Bharani @ Bharanidharan v. The State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.08.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.OP.No.13226 of 2020 Bharani @ Bharanidharan ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by The Inspector of police, Maraimalai Nagar Police Station, Maraimalai Nagar.

Crime No.2340 of 2020 ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in the event of his arrest,in Crime No.2340 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Thirumoorthy For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(This case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 506(ii) IPC, in Crime No.2340 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the de facto complainant, due to which the petitioner and others assaulted the de facto complainant with hands and stone and he sustained injury. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that there was wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the de facto complainant, due to which the petitioners assaulted the de facto complainant with hand and stone causing injury to him and the injured has been discharged from the hospital. He further submitted that there are three previous cases pending against the petitioner herein out of which one relates to Section 302 I.P.C and other two cases https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

relates to Section 307 I.P.C, and history sheet is also pending in H.S.No.63 of 2018. However, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and submissions of 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. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 28/08/2020 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.II, CHENGALPATTU 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MARAIMALAI NAGAR POLICE STATION, MARAIMALAI NAGAR.

CC to M/S. R.THIRUMOORTHY Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.13226/2020 Date :28/08/2020 RVR 22/09/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/