K.Perumal v. State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.24039 of 2023 Crl.O.P.No.24039 of 2023 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN.,J.

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 324, 447 and 506(ii) of I.P.C, in Crime.No.11 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that due to previous land dispute, the petitioner entered into the de-facto complainant's land and abused him and attacked with wooden log. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons. They have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the first petitioner is aged about 73 years and the second petitioner is aged about 70 years. Hence, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner had encroached into the land of the de-facto complainant. Since the charge sheet had been filed showing the accused were absconding, hence, he opposed to grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

Crl.O.P.No.24039 of 2023 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J., nvi 6.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, since charge sheet had been filed showing the accused are absconding and the petitioners are directed to appear before the concerned Court. Hence, the anticipatory bail would not live. This Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 19.10.2023 nvi Crl.O.P.No.24039 of 2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2