Purusothaman v. The State Represented By

Crl.O.P.No.20624 of 2023 Crl.O.P.No.20624 of 2023 RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN.,J.

The petitioners/A1 to A3, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 447 and 506(i) of I.P.C, in Crime No.235 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that there was a wordy quarrel between the petitioners and the de-facto complainant due to land dispute. Hence the case.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner. 4.Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the dispute in a civil nature and civil suit is pending between the petitioners and the de-facto complainant. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

Crl.O.P.No.20624 of 2023 RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN,J., nvi 5.Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) and perused the materials available on record.

6.Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 12.09.2023 nvi Crl.O.P.No.20624 of 2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2