Saranraj v. State By,

P.DHANABAL,J.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.08.2024, for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 379 of I.P.C, in Crime No.298 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner threatened the defacto complainant and stolen ATM Card and withdrawn Rs.80,000/- by swiping the ATM Card. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is an innocent and a false case has been foisted against him. He would further submit that the petitioner is no way connected with the said occurrence.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would contend that the petitioner threatened the defacto complainant and stolen ATM Card and withdrawn Rs.80,000/- by swiping 1/3

the ATM Card. He further submitted that the investigation has not yet been completed and stolen property not yet recovered and there is one previous case similar in nature pending against the petitioner. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5.Heard both side and perused the materials available on record. 6.Considering the gravity of offence and the investigation not yet completed and stolen property has not yet been recovered and there is one previous case similar in nature pending against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

30.09.2024 smn 2/3

P.DHANABAL,J smn 30.09.2024 3/3