Dheena @ Rakesh v. The State Rep By Its,

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 506(ii) and 307 of IPC, in Crime No.233 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 and other accused abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and also threatened the defacto complainant and attacked him with knife. 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 had a wordy quarrel with the defacto complainant. The accused persons attacked the defacto complainant with knife in chest and caused grievous injuries and the injured in still in hospital. 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. 10.08.2022 mn

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

mn 10.08.2022