S.Arul Ananda Kumar v. The Inspector Of Police,

Crl.O.P.No.16478 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 341, 324, 506(2) and 307 of IPC in Crime No. 45 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to money dispute, the petitioner along with other accused abused the defacto complainant in filthy language, assaulted, threatened him with dire consequences and caused injuries to him. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is ready and willing to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed on him. Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the injured has been treated as out patient. He would further submit that there are ten previous cases, similar in nature, pending against the petitioner. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

Lpp

5. Considering the nature of offence committed by the petitioner and taking note of the fact that there are ten previous cases, similar in nature, pending against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 15.07.2022 Lpp Crl.O.P.No.16478 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis