Hariharan v. State Rpe By The Inspector Of Police

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioner/A1, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323, 324 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No.298 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant/Varatharaj is that on 06.11.2022 around 17.45 hours, he gone to a tea shop, at that time, there was a wordy quarrel arose between the petitioner and the defacto complainant. During the quarrel, the petitioner along with other accused have abused him in filthy language and also assaulted him with iron rod resulting in him sustaining injuries. Hence the complaint.

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 he has nothing to do with alleged offence. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the

respondent would submit that on 06.11.2022, the defacto complainant gone to a tea shop, at that time, the petitioner along with other accused have picked up a quarrel with the defacto complainant and during the quarrel, the petitioner along with other accused have abused him in filthy language and also assaulted him with iron rod. He would further submit that the injured is still in the hospital as in-patient and the investigation is at the initial stage. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also of the fact that the injured is still taking treatment as in-patient in the hospital and the case is still at the initial stage of investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed for the present.

15.11.2022 vkr

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

vkr 15.11.2022