S.Sriram v. State Rep. By Its

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :04.09.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.13666 of 2020 S. Sriram, S/o. Shanmugasundaram.

... Petitioner Vs.

The State Represented by, The Inspector of Police, T-4 Madhuravoyal Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.1335 of 2020)

...Respondent

Prayer:

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Connection with the Crime No.1335 of 2020 pending on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.B. Mohanraj For Respondent : Mr. M. Mohamed Riyaz, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(This case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 307 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.1335 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant is that on 23.08.2020 while they were conducting the festival of Vinayagar Chathurthui, the petitioner has assaulted the defacto complainant with knife and also threatened him with dire consequences and thereby the defacto complainant sustained injuries in his head. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and that he is no way connected 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 submitted that there was a wordy quarrel between two groups during the festival of Vinayagar Chathurthi and the petitioner had attacked the defacto complainant with knife and criminally intimidated him with dire consequences and thereby the defacto complainant caused simple injury in his head and the injured has been discharged from the hospital. He would further submit that the other seven accused persons were arrested and they are still in custody. 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 the other seven accused persons are still in custody, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.With the above observation, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 04/09/2020 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, POONAMAALLEE 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T4 MADURAVOYIL POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

CC to M/S.B. MOHANRAJ Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.13666/2020 Date :04/09/2020 RD 22/09/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/