S.Ranjith v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Fourteenth day of June Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.12628 of 2022 S.RANJITH [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PAPARAPATTI POLICE STATION, DHARMAPURI DISTRICT.

(IN CRIME NO.53/2022) For Petitioner : M/S.B.MOHAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(B) and 302 of IPC, in Crime No.53 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and the petitioner are relatives. On the date of occurrence, when the petitioner was carrying out some construction work near his house, the stones had fallen and damaged the shop of the defacto complainant. When the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, there was a wordy quarrel between them during which, the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant's father with iron rod due to which, the defacto complainant's father died. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and no way connected with the alleged offence. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that there are totally 2 accused. The petitioner has specific overtact, since he only attacked the deceased with iron rod and as such the deceased sustained grievous injury and died. It is a case of 302. In fact, the petitioner's first anticipatory bail was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court. Hence he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much necessary in this case. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 14/06/2022 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 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PAPARAPATTI POLICE STATION, DHARMAPURI DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.B.MOHAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.12628/2022 Date :14/06/2022 CSK 22/06/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/