Saravanan @ Paavodum Thoppu Saravanan @ Dubai Saravanan v. State Rep. By

Crl.O.P.Nos.20504 and 20509 of 2019 Crl.O.P.Nos.20504 and 20509 of 2019 V.BHARATHIDASAN,J.

The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Section 379 r/w 34 of IPC , in Crime Nos.143 and 144 of 2020, respectively, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners had stolen gold chain from the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and no way connected with the alleged offences. He would further submit that a false case has been foisted against the petitioners. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed a counter and submitted that the investigation is completed and a charge sheet has also been filed. He further submitted that the petitioners are habitual offenders and there are so many previous cases pending against the petitioners. Hence, he prays for dismissal of this petition.

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

Crl.O.P.Nos.20504 and 20509 of 2019 V.BHARATHIDASAN,J.

ub

5. Considering the fact that the petitioners have involved in serious offences and the petitioners are habitual offender, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petitions stand dismissed.

11.01.2021 ub Crl.O.P.Nos.20504 and 20509 of 2019 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/