S.Saranraj v. State By Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.23872 of 2024 P.DHANABAL, J.

When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) represented that all the offences charged against the petitioners are bailable in nature and instead of Section 117(2) of BNS, they have wrongly mentioned as Section 117(1) of BNS in FIR. This Court also perused the records including the FIR. In the FIR, it has been mentioned as Sections 191(2), 296(b), 115(2), 117(1) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023. But, the said allegations only attract the Section 117(2) of BNS. Since all the alleged offences are bailable in nature, the question of granting anticipatory bail will not arise. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is not maintainable.

2.

Therefore, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. The petitioners are at liberty to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

27.09.2024 ssa https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis