Kathiravan v. State Rep By.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :15.10.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.16420 of 2020 Kathiravan ... Petitioner Vs.

State Rep by the Inspector of Police, R-7, K.K.Nagar Police Station, K.K.Nagar, Chennai 600 078.

... 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.820 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Velmurugan For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(This case has been heard through video conferencing) The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 392, 294(b) and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.820 of 2020, seeks anticipatory bail.

The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant viz., Ranjani, is that the petitioner and two other accused have restrained her and her son viz., Akash, threatened them for having sent them to prison, abused and demanded money from them. Further it is alleged that accused persons have snatched the bag from the defacto complainant and had robbed an amount of Rs.1000/- at knife point. Hence, the complainant.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this is the second application for anticipatory bail and that earlier application for anticipatory bail was dismissed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.12675 of 2020, dated 01.09.2020. He would submit that during the earlier hearing, the respondent had insisted five previous cases against the petitioner. He would further submit that without prejudice to this case, the petitioner had pleaded guilty and all the cases stand disposed of and that in Crime No. 684 of 2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the petitioner has been arrested and released on conditional bail in M.P.No.7724 of 2020, dated 29.06.2020. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner is involved in five previous cases and that the conviction would show that the petitioner is an habitual offender. He would further submit that the third accused in this case is still in custody. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Taking into consideration the facts and submissions made by the learned counsels and considering the previous antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

-sd/- 15/10/2020 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, SAIDAPET.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, R.7 K.K NAGAR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI-600 078.

CC to M/S.M.VELMURUGAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.16420/2020 Date :15/10/2020 cs 23/10/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/