Jaisimmanayak v. State Inspector Of Police

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 364A, 365, 506(II) of IPC, in Crime No.42 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused kidnapped the defacto complainant for ransom and also received a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- from the defacto complainant. 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. He would further submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, based on the confession statement of the co-accused. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that there are totally 4 accused in which the petitioner is arrayed as A4.

The petitioner and other accused kidnapped the defacto complainant and committed dacoity. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. It is seen that the petitioner along with other accused kidnapped the defacto complainant for ransom and also received a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-. So far, A1 to A3 have been arrested and released on bail. However, only to a sum of Rs.50,000/- was recovered from the petitioner herein. Balance amount to a sum of Rs.9,50,000/- is yet to be recovered from the petitioner herein. The petitioner is the master brain behind the entire crime.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, 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.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 23.08.2022 mn

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

mn 23.08.2022