Rafiq Ahmed @ Rafeeq Ahamad v. State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.16561 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 307 and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.92 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioners waylaid the defacto complainant and threatened him. The petitioners also attacked the defacto complainant with hands and iron rod and caused injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and no way connected with the alleged offence. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned counsel for the Intervener vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioners herein threatened the defacto complainant and also attacked him

with iron rod and caused grievous injuries in head. The injured is still in the hospital and has 24 stitches on the head. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the bad antecedents of the petitioners, the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is very much required in this case. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 18.07.2022 mn

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

mn Crl.O.P.No.16561 of 2022 18.07.2022