Veerapathiran v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18/10/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V. SIVAGNANAM Veerapathiran ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The State rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Thadicombu Police Station, Dindigul District.

Crime No.224 of 2023..

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Manikandan.P., Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.R.M.S.Sethuraman, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.224 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police. 1/4

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/sole accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 147,447,427,506(i) and 379 of IPC in Crime No.224 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had borrowed loan from the Indus Ind Bank. He filed the Arbitration petition before the Sole Arbitrator and he obtained an exparte order and challenging the said order petitioner filed Arbitration Original Petition before this Court and the same was allowed on 07.06.2023. In this situation the defacto complainant has lodged the complaint, hence the case. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and a false case has been foisted against him. He would further submit that the vehicle stands in the name of the mother of the petitioner and she borrowed the loan from the Indusland Bank. He would further submit that the petitioner has parked the vehicle before the office of the defacto complainant and the defacto complainant in collusion with the bank tried to seize the vehicle, hence theft 2/4

case filed against the petitioner. Hence he seeks anticipatory to the petitioner. 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner stating that the petitioner has taken the vehicle without the knowledge of the bank.

5. Taking in to consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the vehicle has been taken by the petitioner without the knowledge of the bank, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Hence the petition stands dismissed.

sd/- 18/10/2023 / TRUE COPY / /10/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

aav 3/4

TO

1. The Inspector of Police, Thadicombu Police Station, Dindigul District.

2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.14432 of 2023 Date :18/10/2023 SSA/VRS (26/10/2023) 4P /3 C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4