Gopi v. State Rep By Its

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN.

J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Section 392 IPC, in Crime No.148 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is falsely implicated on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused. He is not in possession of the gold chain said to have been snatched by the other accused in this case from the defacto complainant. Thus, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail for the petitioner.

3. In response, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that on 27.02.2022, at about 10.00 p.m., when the defacto complainant was answering nature's call, near Porur, EB office, three persons waylaid him and snatched his chain at knife point. They had also taken his cell phone. Then, on 01.03.2022, at about 12.30 p.m., when he

was walking near Porur Junction, he found the person, who threatened him with knife. On seeing the defacto complainant, he tried to run. Defacto complainant and other Public chased and caught him and handed over him to the police. It is informed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that investigation revealed that this petitioner had snatched gold chain and since he is absconding, the gold chain cannot be recovered. Therefore, he prayed for dismissal of this petition. 4.It is seen from the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, especially, from the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that unless petitioner is apprehended, the gold chain cannot be recovered and investigation in this case could not be completed. Thus, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail for the petitioner.

5.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 02.08.2023 sli

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN.

J.

sli 02.08.2023