Y.John David Paul v. State Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Third day of January Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.25693 of 2021 Y.JOHN DAVID PAUL [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T-11, THIRUNINRAVUR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI. (CR.NO.639/2020) For Petitioner : M/S.R.C.PAUL KANAKARAJ Advocate For Respondent : Mr.S.BALAJI, Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 341,294(b), 336, 427, 392, 397 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.639 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 05.09.2020, the petitioner along with one accused waylaid the defacto complainant and demand money with knife point and snatched Rs.500/- from him. Based on the complaint, the respondent police registered a case against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and no way connected with the alleged offence and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that 4 previous cases are pending against the petitioner, on that ground earlier application for grant of anticipatory bail was dismissed. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that of the four cases, one of the case pertains to Section 302 IPC in which after trial the petitioner has been acquitted and the other three cases are not similar to the present case as they pertain to Section 307 IPC. The earlier instructions given by the respondent is not correct and hence he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor reiterated that there are four previous cases of similar nature are pending against the petitioner. Hence he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstance of this case and the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender and four previous case is pending against him, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 03/01/2022 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T-11, THIRUNINRAVUR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.R.C.PAUL KANAKARAJ Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.25693/2021 Date :03/01/2022 RVR 10/01/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/