← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/16523/2020dismissed

U.Raj Kumar v. State Rep By,

2020-10-16Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.10.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.16523 of 2020 1.U.Raj Kumar ... Petitioners 2.S.Yuvaraj Vs.

The State rep. by

...Respondent

The Inspector of Police T-5. Thiruverkadu Police Station Chennai Cr.No.924 of 2020.

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.924 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.L.Uthaya Kumar For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences under Sections 324 & 307 of IPC later altered with Sections 147, 148, 324 and 307 of I{C, in Crime No.924 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the de-facto complainant one Mahendiran is that due to political enmity between the de-facto complainant and A1/Naveen, the accused persons have murdered the brother's son of the de-facto complainant in the year 2013. In order to take revenge against the de-facto complainant, the petitioners along with other accused persons have assaulted the de-facto complainant with Aruval on the head. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner and other accused persons assaulted the de-facto complainant with Aruval on the head. He would further submit A1 has been arrested very recently and A4, A6 and A7 were arrested and they are still in custody. He would further submit that the investigation is in initial stage. He would further submit the coaccused anticipatory bail application was dismissed by this Court in Crl.O.P No.16344 of 2020 on 14.10.2020. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Taking into consideration of the fact that the arrested accused are still in custody and that A1 has been arrested recently and also of the fact that the co-accused anticipatory bail application was dismissed by this Court and that the investigation is in initial stage, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

-sd/- 16/10/2020 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 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T-5,THIRUVERKADU POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.L.UTHAYA KUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.16523/2020 Date :16/10/2020 TA-29/10/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/