Ramu v. The State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.25933 of 2022 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J., The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 294(b), 323, 307 and 506(ii) IPC in Crime No.385 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution as per defacto complainant/Kabali is that on 24.09.2022 while he was returning after purchasing tiffin, the accused had way laid him and assaulted him with sickles and knife resulting in the defacto complainant sustained injuries. 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. He would submit that the arrested accused have been enlarged on bail. Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail.

4.The learned Government Advocate (crl. side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offendor and six previous case is pending against him. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA. J, tsh

5. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender and six previous case is pending against him. I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, the criminal original petition stands dismissed.

26.10.2022 tsh Crl.O.P.No.25933 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2