Meenkara Mariyappan @ Mariyappan v. State Rep By

Crl.OP.No.21929 of 2022 Crl.O.P.No.21929 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections in 294(b), 324, 506(ii) in Crime No.576 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner went to a hotel and given order for food by sitting in car. When the defacto complainant told them to come inside the hotel, the petitioner abused the defacto complainant and also attacked him. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and no way connected with the alleged offence. He would further submit that on the confession statement given by the co-accused, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant with stones and caused grievous https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.OP.No.21929 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

dk/kv injuries. He also submitted that the petitioner has 16 previous cases. He further submitted that there is no change of circumstance after the dismissal of previous anticipatory bail petition. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstance of the case and also there is no change of circumstances after the dismissal of previous anticipatory bail petition, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 14.09.2022 dk/kv Crl.O.P.No.21929 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis