Madras High CourtCRL OP/17647/2020dismissed

C.Prakash v. The Inspector Of Police

2020-11-20Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.11.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.Nos.17647, 17649 and 17651 of 2020 C. Prakash ... Petitioner in all Crl.O.P's Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Karimangalam Police Station, Dharmapuri District (Crime No.264 of 2020) ... Respondent in all Crl.O.P's Common Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge bail in the event of arrest in connection with Crime Nos.264, 399 and 108of 2020 pending on the file of respondent police.

( In all Crl.O.P's) For Petitioners : Mr. R. Selva Kumar For Respondent : Mr. M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor C O M M O N 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 offences publishable under Sections 457 and 380 of I.P.C in Cr. Nos.264 and 399 of 2018 and section 379 of I.P.C in Crime No.108 of 2018, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that in Crime No. 264 of 2018, the petitioner committed theft of cow along with A1 and in Crime No.399 of 2018 the petitioner broken the door and stolen the welding machines and in Crime No.108 of 2018 the petitioner committed theft of cash from the temple Hundi.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in these cases, based on the confession statement recorded from one A1.Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and there are three previous cases pending against him. As far as the case in Crime No.264 of 2018 is concerned, cow has been recovered from A1. As far as the case in Crime No.399 of 2018 is concerned, welding machines have been recovered from A1 and the petitioner is also involved along with A1 in committing offence. As far as the case in Crime No.108 of 2018 is concerned, an amount of Rs.5,000/- has not been recovered. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into account the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender and has three previous cases to his credit, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petition. Accordingly, these Criminal Original petitions stands dismissed. -sd/- 20/11/2020 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PALACODE 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KARIMANGALAM POLICE STATION, DHARMAPURI DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.R.SELVAKUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges Crl.O.P.Nos.17647, 17649 and 17651 of 2020 Date :20/11/2020 RVR 02/12/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/