Kalivannan @ Pandaravadai Kalaivannan v. State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.26215 of 2022 Crl.O.P.No.26215 of 2022 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J., The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b) and 307 in Crime No.1240 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the Head Constable of Perambur Police Station. While he was on duty, he suspected the petitioner and enquired him. In reply, the petitioner gave an evasive reply and abused him in filthy language and he had attempted to do away the defacto complainant by using aruval. Hence, the case. 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. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner is a habitual offender against whom, there are thirty previous cases pending, out of which four are 302 IPC cases and that he is absconding. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

Crl.O.P.No.26215 of 2022 anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.J, Anu

5. Taking into consideration the gravity of offence committed by the petitioner and the previous cases pending against him, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17.11.2022 Anu Crl.O.P.No.26215 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2