Madras High CourtCRL OP/20908/2021dismissed

Dharma @ Dharman v. State Rep By

2021-11-02Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Second day of November Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION Nos.20908 & 20911 of 2021 DHARMA @ DHARMAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED IN CRL.O.P.No.20908 of 2021 ] 1 SUGAN @ SUGANRAJ 2 VENKATESAN [ PETITIONERS / ACCUSED IN CRL.O.P.No.20911 of 2021 ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IN CRL.O.P.No.20908 of 2021 ] THIRUVANNAMALAI TOWN POLICE STATION, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT (CRIME NO.1139/2021) STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IN CRL.O.P.No.20911 of 2021 ] THIRUVANNAMALAI TOWN POLICE STATION, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT (CRIME NO.1139/2021) For Petitioner : M/S. R.BALAKRISHNAN, Advocate [IN CRL.O.P.No.20908 of 2021 ] For Petitioner : M/S. M.K.GAUTHAMAN, Advocate [IN CRL.O.P.No.20911 of 2021 ] For Respondent : MR. C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) [IN BOTH THE PETITIONS]

PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners in Crl.O.P.Nos.', were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.09.2021 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 399 of IPC in Cr.No.1139 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2.The case of the prosecution in Crl.O.P.Nos.' is that the petitioners along with other accused persons appear to have planned to commit dacoity. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners have been in jail from 24.09.2021. He furthermore submitted that earlier, this Court had dismissed the bail petitions filed by the petitioners in Crl.O.P.Nos.18654 and 18662 of 2021 dated 07.10.2021. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the petitioners along with other accused persons appear to have planned to commit dacoity and there are seven previous cases pending against A-1 and three previous cases pending against A-2 and A-4, all the cases are similar in nature. He further submits that earlier this Court had dismissed the bail petitions filed by the petitioners and these are the second bail petitions filed by them. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioners.

Considering the previous cases pending against the petitioners which are similar in nature and that the earlier bail petitions were dismissed by this Court and there is no change of circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners in the above Crl.O.P.Nos'.

6.Accordingly, these criminal original petitions are dismissed. -sd/- 02/11/2021 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 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVANNAMALAI TOWN POLICE STATION, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVANNAMALAI TOWN POLICE STATION, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

4 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, VELLORE.

5 THE OFFICER INCHARGE SUB JAIL, POLUR.

CC to M/S. R.BALAKRISHNAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.Nos.20908 & 20911 of 2021 Date :02/11/2021 RW 15/11/2021