Barath v. State By

CRL.O.P.No.8619 of 2016 S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.

Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 IPC in Crime No.39 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police, the petitioners have come forward with this petition seeking anticipatory bail.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners entered into a TASMAC shop by breaking the lock and committed theft of 254 bottles.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case.

5. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would submit that the petitioners are having two previous cases.

6. Considering the nature of the offence committed by the petitioners and also taking note of the fact that the petitioners are having two previous cases, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. 29.06.2016 ari

S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.

ar CRL.O.P.No.8619 of 2016 29.06.2016