Arikki @ Arivalagan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Thirteenth day of October Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.13957 of 2017 ARIKKI @ ARIVALAGAN ... PETITIONER/1st ACCUSED Vs STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THANJAVUR WEST POLICE STATION, TANJAVORE.

(IN CRIME NO. 335/2017) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.K.JEGAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.ANBARASAN, Government Advocate(Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/accused No.1, who was arrested and remanded into judicial custody on 07.09.2017, for the offences punishable under Sections 294 (b), 334, 506(ii) and 307 of IPC r/w 3(1) of TNPPDL Act, in Crime No.335 of 2017, on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other two co-accused entered into the defacto complainant's shop and purchased a chapel and without paying the money, they came out of the shop. The same was questioned by the defacto complainant, thereby, the petitioner and other co-accused scolded the defacto complainant in filthy language and caused damage to the shop objects worth about Rs.2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand and Five Hundred only) and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the defacto complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner and other coaccused before the respondent police. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. 4.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the state would submit that the petitioner has seven previous case and he is a habitual offender. He further submitted that if this Court enlarge the petitioner in bail, he will commit the same offence. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this bail petition is dismissed. sd/- 13/10/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THANJAVUR WEST POLICE STATION, TANJAVORE.

2. THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY.

3. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.13957 of 2017 Date :13/10/2017 MS/CM-MSA/SAR.2/27.10.2017/2P.4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/