Madras High CourtCRL OP/12976/2020dismissed

Mathew@Vasanth v. The State Rep.By

2020-08-26Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 26.08.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No. 12976 of 2020 Mathew @ Vasanth ... Petitioner/Accused Vs.

State represented by, The Inspector of Police, F-2, Egmore Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.604 of 2020) ... Respondent/Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.604 of 2020, pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.W.M.Abdul Azeez For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohammed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 457, 380 of IPC, in Crime No.604 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along other accused committed house breaking and stolen two Computer, one Printer, three Mobile Phones, Cash worth of Rs.8,000/- and 3 grams of Gold Chain from the defacto complainant place. Hence, the compliant.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner along with other accused committed house breaking and stolen two Computer, one Printer, three Mobile Phones, Cash worth of Rs.8,000/- and 3 grams of Gold Chain from the defacto complainant place. The two other accused has been arrested and recovered one Computer, one Printer and Rs.1000/-, and the other items has to be recovered from the petitioner. He would further submit that there are three previous cases pending against him. Therefore, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration, the facts and submissions made by the learned counsel and the fact that there are three previous cases pending against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner for the present.

Hence, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed for the present.

-sd/- 26/08/2020 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE NO.XIV, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, F-2, EGMORE POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

CC to M/S. W.M.ABDUL AZEEZ Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.12976/2020 Date :26/08/2020 MK:10/09/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/