Ruban v. The State Rep By Its,

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.07.2022 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 341, 294(b), 392, 397 & 506(2) of IPC in Crime No.370 of 2022, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner waylaid the de-facto complainant and abused him in a filthy language and by threatening him at knife point robbed a sum of Rs.350/- from him. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the petitioner is a habitual offender and there are nine previous cases against him. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. The previous cases against the petitioner are tabulated hereunder:- S.No PS Crime No.

Sections 1.

M3 300/2011 147, 148, 323, 307 IPC 2.

M3 26/2016 147, 148, 302 r/w 120(b), 109, 149, 213 IPC 3.

P4 617/2016 147, 148, 294 (b), 323, 392 r/w 397, 506(ii) IPC 4.

P4 146/2019 147, 148, 341, 324, 307 r/w 149 IPC 5.

P4 147/2019 147, 148, 341, 294 (b), 336, 397, 506 (ii) IPC 6.

P2 277/2019 341, 294(b), 397, 506(ii) IPC 7.

P4 177/2021 147, 148 , 302 IPC 8.

P4 89/2019 4(1)(a) r/w 4(1-A)TNP Act 9.

P4 695/2020 4(1)(a) r/w 4(1-A)TNP Act

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender and having nine previous cases, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

09.09.2022 ham

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

ham 09.09.2022