Mugilan v. State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18-12-2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 31578 of 2024 Mugilan S/o. Purushothaman, No 3/256 kakkan street, Ganapathy nagar Vandalur,, Chengalpattu District Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police Peerkankaranai Police Station, Tambaram City (crime No. 477 Of 2024) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

Vijayaragavan Marimuthu J.Saktheeswari S.Rithika K.Dhivyashree T.Hemalatha For Respondent(s):

Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115, 118(1) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 in Crime No.477 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/4

2.

The case of the prosecution is that on 29.10.2024, the defacto complainant was taken by the accused persons on the instigation of the petitioner herein in a two wheeler and attacked by them using wooden logs and the petitioner herein had threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences over video call. Hence, this case. 3.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition, that may be imposed by this Court and also to appear and co-operate for the investigation, therefore, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner, stating that, the defacto complainant had entered into a dispute, which arouse between the XII Standard school studying students, thereby, the defacto complainant was abused and taken by the accused persons in a two wheeler and attacked by them using wooden logs. He also submitted that the petitioner herein threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences and the 2/4

injured is still in hospital. He further submitted that the petitioner herein has three previous cases and the investigation is still pending. 5.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record including the FIR. 6.

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and considering that the petitioner has 3 previous cases and also the fact that the injured is still in hospital, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. 18.12.2024 stn A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

3/4

stn To

1. State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police Peerkankaranai Police Station, Tambaram City (crime No. 477 Of 2024) Crl.O.P. No.31578 of 2024 18.12.2024 4/4