Ponmurugan v. State Rep By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

This criminal original petition has been filed seeking to enlarge the petitioner on bail in respect of Crime No.318 of 2022, on the file of the respondent Police.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 03.07.2022 at about 6.00 hours, the de-facto complainant/Sudhakar, lodged a complaint before the respondent Police by stating that he along with his family doing human hair business for the past 20 years. While so, on 02.07.2022, at about 2.00 p.m., the accused enquired the de-facto complainant for want of hair through a phone call and due to which, at about 7.00 p.m., the accused reached the de-facto complainant's home and enquired the price of the human hair and left the de-facto complainant's home. After some time, the accused along with other unknown persons went into the de-facto complainant's house and by threatening the de-facto complainant and his family at knife point, had

taken away the seven human hair bundle, 2 Samsung mobile and one Honor mobile from their home. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a trader of human hair and due to the dispute between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant regarding payment, a false complaint has been given against the petitioner. He would also submit that the petitioner is in custody in 15.08.2022. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. Per contra, the Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner is a habitual offender who has 13 previous cases of similar nature. He would further submit as far as this case is concerned, the petitioner along with the other accused threatened the de-facto complainant and his family at knife point and taken away the seven human hair bundle, 2 Samsung mobile and one Honor mobile from their home, Hence, he vehemently oppose for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. The previous cases against the petitioner are tabulated hereunder:- S.No Police Station Crime No.

Sections 1.

Nungambakkam 2116/2012 379 IPC 2.

Sitlapakkam 800/2006 379 IPC 3.

Kodungaiyur 648/2006 34, 379, 511 IPC 4.

Kodungaiyur 646/2006 457, 380 IPC 5.

Nolambur 694/2011 457, 380 IPC 6.

Nolambur 975/2011 457, 380 IPC 7.

Maduravoyal 129/2022 379 IPC 8.

Maduravoyal 133/2022 294(b), 336, 341 & 397 IPC 9.

Aminjikarai 457/2006 427, 506(2), 379 IPC 10.

Ambattur 649/2000 379 IPC 11.

Ambattur 763/2000 379 IPC 12.

Ambattur 443/2006 384, 448 IPC 13.

Ambattur 1267/2017 110 Cr.P.C

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

7. 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 14 previous cases, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed for the present.

26.09.2022 ham

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

ham 26.09.2022