Boss @ Baskaran v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Thirteenth day of October Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.18731 of 2015 1 BOSS @ BASKARAN 2 ARJUNAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 & 2 Vs THE STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KENIKKARAI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

CRIME NO. 416 OF 2015. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S M.SUBASH BABU Advocate For Respondent : Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 and A2, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 324 and 506(ii) of I.P.C. in Crime No.416 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail. 2.According to the prosecution that the de-facto complainant is an employee in Thope of Isruth of Sathankulam and on 12.09.2015 after dinner, he was residing at Thope and the accused in an inebriated mood developed quarrel with the de-facto complainant and also attacked him with aruval and sickle and caused grievous injuries. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case and it is further submitted that the injured has been discharged from the hospital.

4.However, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail petition contending that the first accused is having 10 previous cases and he is a notorious rowdy in that area and in Paragraph No.5 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, the case registered against the first accused is narrated. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) further submitted that the injured has sustained grievous injuries and still he is taking treatment. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the previous cases pending against the first petitioner and also considering the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, this

Court is of the opinion that the accused are not entitled to get anticipatory bail. Hence, this petition is dismissed. sd/- 13/10/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KENIKKARAI POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT. CR. NO. 416 OF 2015.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.18731 of 2015 Date :13/10/2015 GJM/JGB/SARII-20.10.2015-2P-3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/