F. Andrews v. State Rep.By Its

Crl.O.P.No.23197 of 2023 Crl.O.P.No.23197 of 2023 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN.,J.

The petitioner/A1, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 341, 324, 307 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C, in Crime No.163 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that all the accused persons, had joined together in assaulting the son of the de-facto complainant by causing injury in the back side of the head by using knife and there was a bleeding injury. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to grant to anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that all accused attacked the son of de-facto complainant by using knife and sustained bleeding injuries. A2 to A4 were already arrested and they are still in custody and one more accused is absconding. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J., https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

Crl.O.P.No.23197 of 2023 nvi 5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (crl.side) for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.

6.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and the nature of seriousness of the injury caused to the son of de-facto complainant, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 09.10.2023 nvi Crl.O.P.No.23197 of 2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2