Lokesh v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police

CRL OP NO. 973 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21-01-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 973 of 2025 Lokesh S/o. Settu, Arunthathiyar Colony, Amburpet, Vaniyambadi Taluk, Tirupathur District.

Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police Natarampalli Police Station, Natarampalli, Tirupathur District. (Crime No. 453 of 2024) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): Mr. Vinodh Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr. S.Santhosh, Government Advocate (Criminal Side).

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 304(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (B.N.S), in Crime No.453 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with other co-accused, snatched an Oppo mobile phone from the de-facto complainant. Hence the case.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person, and he has been falsely implicated in this case. There are three accused in total, with the petitioner being A2. A1 allegedly snatched the mobile phone. Furthermore, he submitted that merely based on the confession statement of A1, the petitioner was implicated in this case. He also submitted that this is the second anticipatory bail application, the earlier application in Crl.O.P.No.29159 of 2024 was dismissed on 25.11.2024. Further, he submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Therefore, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail.

4. In contrast, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that the petitioner is habitual offender. Furthermore, he submitted that the petitioner has two previous cases pending against him, both of which are similar in nature. Therefore, if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, there is a possibility that he will commit a similar offence in the future.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl Side) for the respondent and perused the entire materials

available on record.

6. This is the second application for anticipatory bail. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and taking note of the fact that the petitioner is an habitual offender and there is no change in circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 21-01-2025 klt To

1. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police Natarampalli Police Station, Natarampalli, Tirupathur District.

(Crime No. 453 of 2024)

A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

klt CRL OP NO. 973 of 2025 21-01-2025