P.Manikandan v. State By Inspector Of Police

Crl.OP.No.19183 of 2022 Crl.O.P.No.19183 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 450, 342 & 397 IPC in Crime No.139 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. There are totally nine accused in this case, in which the petitioner is arrayed as A8. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused persons is alleged to have trespassed the defacto complainant's beauty parlour and threatened them with knife point and snatched 1⁄2 Sovereign of gold chain and an amount of Rs.81,000/-. Hence the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Based on the confession statement of the co-accused, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.OP.No.19183 of 2022 Anu 4.The learned Public Prosecutor, Puducherry appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner is alleged to have snatched 1⁄2 Sovereign of gold chain and an amount of Rs.85,000/- from the defacto complainant and he is also a history sheeter. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the fact that the petitioner has involved in the said crime and also he is a history sheeter, as such the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 16.08.2022 Anu Crl.O.P.No.19183 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis