Radhakrishnan @ Blacksekar v. State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.20918 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for offences punishable under Sections 285 and 420 IPC in Crime No.193 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that based upon a secret information on 23.08.2022, the respondent police went to the BangaloreChennai Highway Road at Sumaithangi Village and found that the petitioner along with other accused were in possession of 260 Litres of diesel and 20 Litres of Petrol without any valid license. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner along with other accused were in possession of 260 Litres of diesel and 20 Litres of Petrol without any valid license. He would further G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

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

Anu submit that there are five previous cases pending as against the petitioner. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner and the previous cases pending against him, this Court finds that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required in this case. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 01.09.2022 Anu Crl.O.P.No.20918 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis