Hari @ Hariharan v. State Rep By

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

The Petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the Respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 399 of IPC in Crime No.96 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that while the Respondent Police and his team were on their routine patrol duty, they found the Petitioner along with other accused planned to commit robbery from the person, who are all crossing them. Hence the complaint.

3.Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case, based on the confession statement recorded from the arrested accused and the co-accused was already arrested and released on bail by order of the learned District and Sessions Judge, District and Sessions Court No.II, Kancheepuram in Crl.MP.No.1537 of 2023 dated 12.07.2023. Hence, the learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail to the Petitioner. 4.Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that this is 1/ 3

the second anticipatory bail petition and the first one was already dismissed by this Court in Crl.OP.No.18386 of 2023 dated 21.08.2023. He opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the Respondent Police. 6.Taking into consideration the facts and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either sides and the fact that there is no change of circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner. 7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed with liberty to file fresh Petition.

26.09.2023 sai 2/ 3

RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.

sai 26.09.2023 3/ 3