Satheesh Prabhu v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 12/07/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN CRL OP(MD). No.12373 of 2023 Satheesh Prabhu ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The State, through The Inspector of Police, Eraniel Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

(Crime No.295 of 2023).

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.R.Maheswaran Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.295 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent Police

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Sole Accused, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 427, 447, 294(b), 506(ii) of I.P.C, in Crime No.295 of 2023 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that when the accused and his friends visited the tea shop, which is run by the defacto complainant, often they created problems. On 27.06.2023, the accused indulged in very same activity. Thereafter, they also trespassed into the house of the defacto complainant and abused him. Based on which, the brother of the defacto complainant registered a complaint in C.S.R. No.329 of 2023. Due to above vengeance, on 27.06.2023 at about 9.45 p.m., the accused and others went to the shop of the defacto complainant with weapons, caused damage to the shop hold articles worth about Rs.25,000/-, also abused, threatened the defacto complainant and shop employees with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and due to vengeance, the defacto complainant made a false complaint against the petitioner before the respondent Police.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the photographs have been produced before this Court, wherein we see that the petitioner and others alleged to have caused damage to the shop hold articles. Hence, he makes serious objection to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case and considering the grievous allegations made against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this anticipatory bail petition deserves dismissal and accordingly dismissed.

sd/- 12/07/2023 / TRUE COPY / /08/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

indu TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE ERANIEL POLICE STATION KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12373 of 2023 Date :12/07/2023 (2/2) SS/VR/04/08/2023/4P/3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023