Thiruppathi v. State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 12.09.2024 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Thiruppathi ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The Inspector of Police, Anna Nagar Police Station, Madurai City.

Crime No.581 of 2024 ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.A.Albert James Government Advocate (Crl. side) For Intervenor : Mr.Andiraj PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 482 BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.581 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(3) of the BNS, 2023 and 1/4

Section 4 of TNPW Act, in Crime No.581 of 2024, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is the petitioner, who was attacked indiscriminately by the Lawyers in the corridor and the petitioner only retaliated.

3.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the President of the Bar/intervenor would submit that this is a case in a daredevil manner, in the Court corridor itself, the Advocate has been brutally attacked and there is a fracture in his wrist and he is presently admitted in the hospital and is undergoing treatment. 4.The CCTV footage is very much available.

Prima facie, on playing and viewing of the CCTV footage, it can be seen that, first the petitioner is there in the corridor with a very anxious body language and he goes hither and thither and when he goes in one direction, the defacto complainant/Advocate is seemed to be coming out of the door from the counselling center, immediately there seems to be a wordy altercation between the both parties and something which has been uttered by the petitioner seems to have attracted the attention of the other Lawyers, who are standing nearby and immediately both sides are charging against each other and it is seen that 3 or 4 Lawyers are raising their hands and the petitioner is also raising his hand at the same time and they are attacking each other.

Therefore, when violence is resorted to inside the Court, it will be dealt with by the Court sternly.

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has also given a complaint. If that be so, the same will also be looked into by the Investigating officer.

6.But in this case, I am not in a position to prima facie accept the case of the petitioner that only because the all the lawyers had trashed him, he had to retaliate. I can see from the CCTV footage that from the very word go, both sides are lifting their hand. Therefore, on a cursory look of the footage, the case of the petitioner cannot be accepted and when violence is resorted to in the counselling center or any other place inside the Court campus, it cannot be taken lightly by the Court. In view thereof, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. sd/- 12/09/2024 / TRUE COPY / /10/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

JBR TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANNA NAGAR POLICE STATION, MADURAI CITY, 3/4

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

+1 CC to M/s.T.LENINKUMAR, Advocate ( SR-11279[I] dated 13/09/2024 )

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.15410 of 2024 Date :12/09/2024 SS/VR/SAR- /10/10/2024/4P/4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4