R.Durai Arasan @ Durai Raj v. State Rep By

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 384 and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.185 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and his friend were running a street food stall at Vadapalani, while so, on 21.06.2022, the petitioner along with other accused ate food and when asked for money, the first petitioner took knife and pointed out the defacto complainant's nect and other taken away Rs.1050/- from the food stall. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and a false case has been foisted against him. Hence, he prays for grant of Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner along with other accused ate food and when asked for money, they attacked the defacto complainant with neck and taken away Rs.1050 from the food stall. He further submit that the petitoner is having eight previous cases against him. Therefore, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that there are eight previous cases as againt the petitioner, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required, this Court is not inclined to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 07.07.2022 drl

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

drl 07.07.2022