Anand @ Venkatanand v. The Inspector Of Police

CRL OP(MD). No.8680 of 2020 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27/08/2020 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.BHARATHIDASAN CRL OP(MD). No.8680 of 2020 Anand @ Venkatanand ... Petitioner/Accused No.3 Vs The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Ammapet Police Station, Thanjavur District.

(Crime No.930 of 2020). ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Venkatesan, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.K. Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.930 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as A3, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 294(b) and 302 of IPC, in Crime No.930 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.Totally there are six accused in this case. The case of the prosecution is that earlier the deceased udhaya was worked as labour in a chicken stall owned by the Baskar/A2, who is the father of the first accused. Due to dispute, there was a wordy quarrel between the deceased and first accused and the deceased left his shop and the deceased started new chicken stall nearby the first petitioner's chicken stall. Due to which, the first petitioner and other accused went to the deceased's shop and said to have attacked the deceased with deadly weapons and caused death. Hence, the present complaint. 3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

CRL OP(MD). No.8680 of 2020 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is not present in the place of occurrence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he seek anticipatory bail.

5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), appearing for the respondent police submitted that due to previous enmity, the first petitioner and other accused went to the deceased's shop and said to have attacked the deceased with deadly weapons and caused death. Hence, the crime has been registered. He further submitted that the petitioner is the one of the named accused and other accused persons have already been arrested and remanded to judicial custody.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that due to previous enmity, the occurrence said to have taken place and the petitioner is the one of the named accused and other accused persons have already been arrested and remanded to judicial custody and as per FIR, there is a serious allegation against the petitioner that he attacked the deceased with Patta Kathi, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. sd/- 27/08/2020 / TRUE COPY / / /2020 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

TO 1.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE AMMAPET POLICE STATION,THANJAVUR DISTRICT.

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

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.8680 of 2020 Date :27/08/2020 VSG PK/JC/SAR-2/01.09.2020 : 2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2