Babu v. State By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 420 & 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.18 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant had entrusted two cars to the petitioner, whereas the petitioner cheated the defacto complainant by not returning the cars. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that due to evidence dispute, a false complaint has been lodged against the petitioner. He would further submit that no such cars were entrusted to the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the petitioner is the History Sheeter involved in the offences of cheating. Insofar as the petitioner is concerned, there are seven previous cases pending as against him, which got registered in HS.No.540 of 2017. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant of anticipatory bail to the

petitioners.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned Government that the petitioner is the habitual offender involved in similar cases, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 13.09.2022 Anu

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

Anu 13.09.2022