Appu @ Karthick v. The State Of Tamil Nadu, Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.11.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.15587 of 2020 Appu Karthick ... Petitioner Vs.

State Rep. By The Sub-Inspector of Police, Salavakkam Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

(Cr.No.378/2019) ... Respondent Prayer:

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of her arrest in Connection with the Cr. No.378 of 2019 pending on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.K.M.Appaji 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, 341, 294 (b), 324, 364, 307 & 506 (ii) of IPC, in Cr.No.378 of 2019, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant viz., Dillibabu is that while the defacto complainant was walking near the Nelvoyal Village, the accused had come with an innova car, kidnapped the defacto complainant threatening him with deadly weapons and abused him in filthy language and taken into Savuku thoppu and attempted to assault him. Thereafter, the defacto complainant escaped from the scene of occurrence. Hence, the complaint.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has not committed as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner is a notorious person and he has 13 previous cases out of which two cases are under Section 302 IPC and three cases are under Section 307 IPC. He would further submit that A1 to A5 have been arrested and A7 is still in custody. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and submissions of the learned Counsel and also the fact that there are 13 previous cases pending as against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 09/11/2020 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, UTHIRAMERUR, KANCHEEPURAM.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SALAVAKKAM POLICE STATION, KANCHEEPURAM.

CC to M/S. C.K.M.APPAJI Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.15587/2020 Date :09/11/2020 MK:01/12/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/