Ganesan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 25/08/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN CRL OP(MD). No.13115 of 2022 Ganesan ... Petitioner/Accused Rank Not Known Vs State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Keeraithurai Police Station (Crime), Madurai City.

(Crime No.311 of 2022).

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Aravind Raj.R, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.311 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under section 380 I.P.C., in Crime No.311 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek/s anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 16.05.2022, at about 7.45 p.m., the defacto complainant has lodged a complaint stating that the he is working as accountant in Sacs Power (P) Ltd., and the CCTV cameras, which are fixed in front of his company was taken away by the some unidentifiable persons and also CCTV Cameras fixed in nearby companies.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

3. On perusal of the records it is seen that earlier anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner in Crl.O.P(MD). No.9771 of 2022 was dismissed by this Court on 24.06.2022 on the ground that the petitioner is having bad antecedents in Crime No.987 of 2020 for the offence under Section 397 IPC.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner is having four previous cases, out of which, three cases are petty offences and the same need not be taken into account. He would further submit that only one CCTV camera has been recovered and the remaining is yet to be recovered. He would further submit that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case like that of previous cases. This contention cannot be considered by this Court at this stage.

6. According to the Government Advocate only one Camera is recovered and the remaining is yet to be recovered, I find no justification to allow this petition. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the respondent police and thereafter, seeks regular bail.

Sd/- 25/08/2022 / TRUE COPY / /09/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TRP To

1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KEERAITHURAI POLICE STATION (CRIME), MADURAI CITY.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.13115 of 2022 Date :25/08/2022 SP/SVR/SAR IV/05/09/2022/2P/3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis