Rangesh @ Jayarangesh v. The Inspector Of Police

EFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21/07/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN 1.Rangesh @ Jayarangesh 2.Suseth @ Dhusiyath 3.Jaideep @ Adhikesavan ... Petitioner / Accused Nos. 4 to 6 Vs State represented by The Inspector of Police, Nadukaveri police station, Thanjavur District.

(In Crime No.103 of 2023) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.R.L.Dhilipan Pandian,Advocate For Respondent : Mr.S.Manikandan Government Advocate (crl.side) PETITIONS FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.103 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners /Accused, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 147, 294(b) and 506(ii) of 1/4

IPC and 3(1) of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, in Crime No.103 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 03.05.2023, the accused persons went to the Tasmac, where the defacto complainant is working and gave Rs.100/- and asked for full bottle. The defacto complainant refused to give and hence the accused persons assaulted the defacto complainant and caused injury. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. They have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence seek for the relief of anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that originally a petition in Cr.M.P.No.2978 of 2023 was filed before the learned Principal District Judge, Thanjavur, seeking anticipatory bail. The petitioners did not comply the order and seeking extension of time for complying the said order, filed a petition and the same was not entertained by the learned Judge and returned, questioning the maintainability of the above said petition. For the second time, he approached this Court by way of this petition.

5.Considering the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), since anticipatory bail was granted already, there is no question of second 2/4

anticipatory bail. The petitioners can workout their remedy before the concerned Court only. The petitioners can represent the petition seeking extension of time before the concerned Court. If the petition is represented by the petitioner, the same shall be considered in accordance with law on the judicial side, by processing the petition.

6. With this liberty, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 21/07/2023 / TRUE COPY / /08/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

PNN TO THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE NADUKAVERI POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

COPY TO THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, THANJAVUR

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.13039 of 2023 Date :21/07/2023 PKP/MR/SAR- /07.08.2023/ 3P/ 4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 3/4

4/4