Madras High CourtCRL OP/19135/2020dismissed

M.Manikandan v. The State Represented By

2020-12-09Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.12.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No. 19135 of 2020 M.Manikandan ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by Inspector of Police , K-7, ICF Police Station, Chennai District.

(Crime No.21 of 2020) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code to enlarge the Petitioner on Bail in Crime No.21 of 2020 on the file of the K-7, ICF Police Station, Chennai District.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Rajendiran For Respondent : Mr.T.Shunmugarajeswaran Government Advocate (Crl. Side) *****

O R D E R

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to the judicial custody on 08.10.2020 for the alleged offences punishable under section 392 IPC in Crime No.21 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the de facto complainant viz., Arokiyaraj is that the petitioner and one another accused have snatched his mobile phone at the knife point and thereafter, they escaped from the scene of occurrence. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and due to previous enmity, a false case has been foisted against the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner was arrested on 08.10.2020 and he is in judicial custody for more than 60 days. Hence he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would vehemently oppose stating that the petitioner along with another accused have snatched the mobile phone of the de facto complainant at the knife point. He would further submit that apart from this case, the petitioner has got two other cases of similar nature.

5. Taking into account the nature of offence and the bad antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

-sd/- 09/12/2020 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 METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE NO.V, EGMORE, CHENNAI.

2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI [FOR INFORMATION] THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL.

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

5 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, K-7, ICF POLICE STATION, CHENNAI DISTRICT.

+1CC to M/S.M.RAJENDIRAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR NO.8099 CRL OP.19135/2020 Date :09/12/2020 MK:14/12/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/