Vivek @ Vivek Raj v. State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.18264 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), 147, 148, 323, 324, 307 and 506(2) of IPC in Crime No. 261 of 2022, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner along with other accused abused and attacked the defacto complainant's brother with wooden log and knife and caused injuries to him. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that there are totally 11 accused involved in this case. The petitioners are arrayed as A10 and A11. The injured has been discharged from the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

hospital on 01.06.2022. He would further submit that A10 is having 13 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

Anu previous cases and A11 is having 10 previous cases pending against them and this is the second anticipatory bail petition. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the bad antecedents on the petitioners and the previous cases pending against the petitioners, there is no change of circumstances to consider the second anticipatory bail petition. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 03.08.2022 Anu Crl.O.P.No.18264 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis