K.Prithikaivasan v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 10.12.2020 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.18377 of 2020

1. K.Prithikaivasan 2 S.Neelkandan .. Petitioners Vs State, rep. by Inspector of Police, Perambalur Police Station, Perambalur District.

(Crime No.2095/2020) .. Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest of their arrest by the respondent in Crime No.2095 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Saranraj For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riaz 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 offence punishable under Section 341, 294(b), 323, 324, and 307 I.P.C. in Crime No. 2095 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the de-facto complainant Mr.Suriya Kumar is that he has got three elder sisters and that on 14.09.2020 at about 09.15 p.m. while he was returning home, the accused have waylaid and abused him in filthy language and also assaulted him. Due to which, he has sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he pray to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the 1st petitioner had love affairs with the sister of defacto complainant, due to which, there was a quarrel and on 14.09.2020, when the defacto complainant was returning home, the petitioners have waylaid and assaulted him with knife. As far as 1st petitioner is concerned, he is involved in five previous cases and as far as 2nd petitioner is concerned, he is involved in two previous cases. Hence, he opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and bad antecedents of the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

-sd/- 10/12/2020 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 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PERAMBALUR POLICE STATION, PERAMBALUR DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S A.SARANRAJ Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.18377/2020 Date :10/12/2020 cs 15/12/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/