Madras High CourtCRL OP/20998/2020dismissed

Rajasekar v. State Rep.By

2020-12-30Honourable Mr Justice G. Chandrasekharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 30.12.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G. CHANDRASEKHARAN Crl.O.P.No.20998 of 2020 Rajasekar ... Petitioner

Versus

State rep.by

...Respondent

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Thalaivasal Police Station, Salem District.

(Crime No.211 of 2019) Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.211 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Chakkaravarthy For Respondent : Mr. M. Mohamed Muzammil, Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 365 of IPC., altered to 364(A) and 120(B) of IPC in Crime No.211 of 2019, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 17.06.2019 at about 8.50 p.m., the de-facto complainant's brother was proceeding from Thalaivasal to Attur in his two wheeler. At that time, some unidentifed persons came in a red color car and kidnapped the defacto complainant's brother. On receiving information from one Anbu, the de-facto complainant lodged a complaint. 3.It is reported by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent/police that the petitioner is involved in many cases, and he is a habitual offender and he has 20 previous cases pending against him. Hence, he would vehemently oppose granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent/police.

5.It is seen from the submissions of the counsel for both sides that the petitioner along with 9 other accused involved in the commission of the offence under Sections 364(A) and 120(B) of IPC., 6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner had committed a very serious offence of Kidnapping for ransom and he has 20 previous cases pending against him, and he is a regular offender, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 30/12/2020 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.II, SALEM.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE SALEM. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 THE SUB - INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THALAIVASAL POLICE STATION, SALEM DISTRICT.

CC to M/S. R.CHAKKARAVARTHY Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.20998/2020 Date :30/12/2020 TA-01/02/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/