Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 112653 (MAD)

SATHISH ALIAS SATHISHKUMAR v. STATE REP. BY, THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

CRL OP/32414/2024 · 2025-01-08

A D Jagadish Chandira

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP NO. 32414 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-01-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 32414 of 2024 Sathish Alias Sathishkumar S/o.Neelakandan, No.138, Thiruvalluvar Nagar, Rattinamangalam, Chengalpet, Melakottiyur Po, Kancheepuram District. Tamil Nadu - 600 048. Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police Thazhambur Police Station, Chennai District. Crime No.425 Of 2024 Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): S.Thiyagarajan For Respondent(s): S.Santhosh, Government Advocate (criminal Side). ORDER Apprehending arrest in connection in connection with Crime No.425 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 296(2), 115(2), 308(4), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and Section 386 of IPC, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail. 2.Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioner, false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioner/A5 seeks indulgence of this court. He would submit that he is no way connected with this case and he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis may be imposed by this Court. 3.The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J. ah grant of anticipatory bail, is that the defacto complainant is doing real estate business. A1 and A2 were acquainted to the defacto complainant. A1 made video call and threatened the defacto complainant to give money and the defacto complainant refused to give money, for which the other accused A3 to A7 assaulted the defacto complainant. He would further submit that there are 10 previous cases as against this petitioner. 4.Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record. 5.Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances of the case and the submission made by the learned Government Advocate, this Court is not inclined to https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 08-01-2025 ah To 1.State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police Thazhambur Police Station, Chennai District. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. CRL OP NO. 32414 of 2024 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis