Thaniga @ Thanigavel v. State Rep By

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 323, 397, 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.515 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. It is also alleged that the petitioner threatened the defacto complainant at knife point and also attacked him with hands. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner along with other accused waylaid the defacto complainant and attacked him and also robbed Rs.7000/- from the defacto complainant. He would also submit that the petitioner is having 5 previous cases against him. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 02.08.2022 mn

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

mn 02.08.2022