Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/14296/2017dismissed

Christy Rolen Prabhu Alias v. The Inspector Of Police

2017-10-25Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Fifth day of October Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.14296 of 2017 CHRISTY ROLEN PRABHU @ PRABHU @ CHRISTY PRABHU ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.5 Vs THE STATE REP.BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE C-5 KARIMEDU POLICE STATION, LAW AND ORDER, MADURAI, CR NO. 647/2017. ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.K.M.PRISCILLA JANCY 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 A5, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 147, 364, 307, 302 and 201 of IPC, in Crime No.647 of 2017, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that one Jothi was kidnapped by the other accused persons for the purpose of grabbing the property. Admittedly, A1 is the son-in-law of the deceased and the other accused, in order to help A1, joined together and involved in the crime. The specific allegation against A5 is that, A5 is the Police Head Constable, who got friendship with A1. After committing the crime, as per the confession of A1, the other accused persons, in order to settle the murder case against A1, pacified the relatives to save A1. But this allegation was strongly opposed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3.Admittedly, the petitioner/A5 is the police Head Constable belonging to law enforcing agency. On a perusal of the confession statement made by A1, the petitioner/A5 gave his car to A1 and he pacified the relatives in order to save A1 from the criminal case.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent submitted that this is the second anticipatory bail application and the earlier anticipatory bail application filed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 05.10.2017. Again the petitioner came up with this application within a short period of time and there is no change of circumstances.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the gravity of offence said to have been committed by the petitioner and also considering the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) that there is no change of circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 25/10/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, C-5 KARIMEDU POLICE STATION, LAW AND ORDER, MADURAI.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.14296 of 2017 Date :25/10/2017 MKV-PM-PN-SAR 2/7.11.2017/2P-3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/