Saranraj @ Vellai, v. State By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the First day of October Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice R.MAHADEVAN and The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.D.AUDIKESAVALU CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.22897 of 2018 SARANRAJ @ VELLAI, [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMBUR TALUK POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT.
CR.NO.193 OF 2018 For Petitioner : M/S.D.A.SUGUMAR Advocate For Respondent : MR. T.P. SAVEETHA, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police in connection with the case in Crime No.193 of 2018 for the offences punishable under Sections 457(2), 380(2), 411(2), 414, 201 and 120-B IPC, the petitioner has come up with this Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail.
2. This is the second petition filed by the petitioner seeking anticipatory bail. Earlier, the petitioner has filed Crl.OP No.16452 of 2018 praying for grant of anticipatory bail and the same was dismissed by this Court by passing a detailed order on 23.08.2018. Therefore, it is not necessary to deal with the facts of the case in detail.
3. However, succinctly, the case of the prosecution can be stated as under:
On 06.05.2018 about 3.00pm, the police personnel of Pernampet Police Station, conducted a raid near the Forest Range Office, Pernampet and found three idols from a car bearing Regn.No.TN09 AW 3339, which was parked before the Forest Office, Pernampet and during the course of enquiry, it came to light that on 08.10.2017, the petitioner and other accused had stolen those idols from Poomalai Murugan Temple at Vellore District and transported the same in the aforesaid car, which resulted in the registration of the present case.
4.According to the petitioner, he is only a driver of the aforesaid car and he does not know the alleged offence committed by the accused. Hence, he prayed for anticipatory bail.
5. Opposing the relief sought in this petition, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), on instructions, submitted that the petitioner is directly involved in the commission of the offence and he is still in abscondence and hence, his presence is required for completion of investigation.
6. Heard the rival submissions and also perused the records.
7. This Court is of the view that the petitioner cannot file this second petition seeking anticipatory bail especially when his earlier petition was dismissed by this Court by passing a detailed order. Further, there is no change of circumstances pointed out by the petitioner for filing this second petition for anticipatory bail. Therefore, this Court finds no ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who is otherwise fleeing from the process of justice.
8. Hence, this petition stands dismissed.
-sd/- 01/10/2018 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMBUT TALUK POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
CC to M/S.D.A.SUGUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges +1 CC to THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, CHENNAI. SR.NO.18527 CRL OP.22897/2018 Date :01/10/2018 TA-16/10/2018