Ramachandran v. State Rep.By Its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.10.2020
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Crl.O.P.No.16778 of 2020
1. Ramachandiran
2. Vairavan
3. Govindaraj ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 Vs.
State By The Inspector of Police, Mathur Police Station, Krishnagiri District.
Crime No.1042 of 2020 ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking to enlarge the petitioners in the event of the arrest in Crime No.1042 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.P.Veera Narayanan For Respondent : Mr.Charles Premkumar Additional Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections294(b), 353, 323, 506(i) of IPC in Crime No.1042 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners herein have encroached upon the public place and put up a hut, which was questioned by the de-facto complainant, who is the staff of Panchayat union office. Further, the petitioners have attacked the de-facto complainant and also threatened with dire consequence for questioning their encroachment upon the Government land. Due to the said attack, the de-facto complainant sustained injuries over his lip and back and he was taken to the hospital for treatment. Hence, a complaint was registered.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the de-facto complainant being a public servant had questioned the act of the petitioners encroachment in the Government land and if the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioners, the same will deter the investigation. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Taking into consideration of the aforesaid submissions of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.
-sd/- 22/10/2020 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 DISTRICT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, POCHAMPALLI 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
3 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MATHUR POLICE STATION, KRISHNAGIRI DISTRICT.
CC to M/S. M.P.SARAVANAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.16778/2020 Date :22/10/2020 RVR 05/11/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/