← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/8916/2020dismissed

Vimal @ Selvakumar v. The Inspector Of Police

2020-08-27Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

CRL OP(MD). No.8916 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.8916 of 2020 Vimal @ Selvakumar ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Woraiyur Police Station, Tiruchirappalli District, (Cr.No. 608 of 2020). ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.M.Boopathi Pandiyan, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.M.Chandra Sekaran, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.608 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/sole accused herein was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.07.2020 for the alleged offences under Sections 392 and 397 of IPC, in Crime No.608 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has waylaid the defacto complainant and forcibly snatched a sum of Rs.1,300/- from him and criminally intimidated him. Hence, the present complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the defacto complainant has filed an affidavit stating that he has not given any complaint before the respondent Police and the respondent police falsely implicated in this case.

4.Earlier when the matter came up for hearing, orally this Court directed the respondent Police to appear before this Court. Today, the Inspector of police is present and submitted that only based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, the crime https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

CRL OP(MD). No.8916 of 2020 has been registered. He further submitted that the petitioner is a rowdy element, out of fear, the defacto complainant has filed an affidavit to that effect.

5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Police submitted that the petitioner is having four previous cases of similar in nature.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that there are four previous cases pending against the petitioner of similar in nature and the petitioner is a notorious rowdy element and the matter is under investigation, if he released on bail, he will tamper with the witensses, hence, at this stage, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 7.Accordingly, this Criminal origional 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 SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI.

2. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, WORAIYUR POLICE STATION, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8916 of 2020 Date :27/08/2020 VSG SRS/ AKM/ SAR-II/ 02.09.2020/ 2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2