B.Krishnamurthy v. The State Rep By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 28.10.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.16779 of 2020 B.Krishnamurthy .. Petitioner Vs.

The State rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police Erode Town Police Station Erode District.

Cr.No.719 of 2020 .. Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.719 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Manoj For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Section 387 of IPC, in Crime No.719 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 18.09.2020, at about 9.00 a.m, while the de-facto complainant was in his Barber shop, the petitioner along with another accused went to the shop of the de-facto complainant and demanded rowdy mamool from him.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case since he happens to be the friend of A1. He would further submit that A1 was arrested and enlarged on bail. Therefore, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner along with A1 demanded rowdy mamool from the shop of the de-facto complainant. He would further submit that the petitioner is an habitual offender and he has two previous cases, out of which one case was registered for the offences under Sections 392 and 397 of IPC and another one is hurt case. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the nature of the allegations made against the petitioner and there are two previous cases against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

-sd/- 28/10/2020 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 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERODE TOWN POLICE STATION, ERODE DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.M.MANOJ Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.16779/2020 Date :28/10/2020 MK:05/11/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/