Brath @ Bharath v. Inspector Of Police
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN,J.
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 294(b) and 384 of IPC, in Crime No.462 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 20.08.2023 at about 14.30 hours, when the defacto complainant was travelling in a car near Parapatti colony along with his family, the petitioner along with other accused waylaid them and demanded money from them by abusing them in filthy language and by intimidating them. The defacto complainant, out of fear has handed over Rs.2,000/- and when the accused persons tried to escape from the scene of occurrence, the defacto complainant along with his relatives caught hold A1 and A2. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has nothing to do with
the alleged offence committed by the other accused and the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner along with other accused waylaid the defacto complainant and his family demanded money and when they refused to give money, the accused abused them in filthy language and threatened them with dire consequences. However, they caught hold the A1 and A2 and produced them to the police and based on the confession statement of the arrested accused, this petitioner has been implicated in this case. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the nature and gravity of offence committed by the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the criminal original petition is dismissed. 21.09.2023 ata
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN,J.
ata 21.09.2023