Baskaran@ Kolzhi Baskaran v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Tenth day of December Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.22925 of 2015 BASKARAN@ KOLZHI BASKARAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.6 Vs STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE APPAYANAYAKKANPATTI, VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT, CR NO.135 OF 2015. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S M.PITCHAI MUTHU Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.6, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for an alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 399, 402 and 120(b) of IPC r/w 5, 25(1), (a) of Arms Act, 1959, in Crime No.

135 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 04.06.2015 at 5.00 a.m., one Tavera Car bearing Registration No.TN 02 X 1531 was stopped by the Special Sub Inspector of Police and came to know that one Pandaram @ Matti @ Arumugam, Gunasekaran and other four persons were in the car and found that some deadly weapons are available in the car and that all the accused persons were gathered and planned to commit revenge murder of one Perumal, who also a rowdy element and involved in various cases including murder case. On the complaint given by the Special Sub Inspector of Police, the case has been registered for the above said offences.

3.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence and he has no knowledge about the dispute between the two groups and on the basis of the confession given by the co-accused, this petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The accused Nos.1 to 4 were arrested and released on bail.

4.The Inspector of Police filed a counter affidavit and in the counter, it has been stated that there was a dispute between one Perumal group and the accused group and therefore, the accused https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

persons with intention to attack the Perumal group conspired together along with deadly weapon and they were arrested along with deadly weapons. The petitioner is having 19 previous cases in Cr.No.1062/1997, 1395/1998, 768/1999, 637/2002, 47/2003, 2103/2004, 1550/2007, 1073/2008, 2164/2008, 425/2009, 1016/2009, 1021/2002, 483/2010, 149/2011, 732/2011, 1591/2011, 688.2012, 132/2012 and 447/2013 on the file of the Annathanapatti police Station, Salem City. This petitioner is the main accused and the accused Nos.1 to 4 were arrested and released on bail and this petitioner is absconding and if he is released on anticipatory bail, he will tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that this petitioner has already filed Crl.O.P.Nos.11061 and 15608 of 2015 for anticipatory bail and after elaborate arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the petitions. In view of that, the petitions are dismissed as withdrawn.

6.Considering the seriousness of the charges levelled against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this petition is dismissed. sd/- 10/12/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE APPAYANAYAKKANPATTI,VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT 2 THE ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.22925 of 2015 Date :10/12/2015 AA/KBM/SAR-I/15.12.2015/2p-3c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/