The High Court of Madras, through a Single Judge, dismissed a bail petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The court refused bail because the petitioner was a notorious person with four prior criminal cases and the investigation was still in its initial stage.
Bail petition dismissed; order to be observed and carried into execution.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.09.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.14268 of 2020
SENTHILKUMAR @ SENTHIL
... Petitioner
Vs.
State, represented by
The Inspector of Police Sholavaram Police Station Thiruvallur District
(Crime No.4194 of 2020) ... Respondent
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C., to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in Crime No.4194 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr. P.Chandrasekar
For Respondent : Mr.T.Shunmugarajeswaran
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
(This case has been heard through video conference)
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to the Judicial Custody on 28.07.2020, for the offences punishable under Section 392, 397 IPC, in Crime No. 4194 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police seeks bail.
2.The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant one Raja is that on 16.07.2020 the accused had abused him in filthy language and by threatening him with weapons robbed a sum of Rs.25,000/- from him.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case since he happened to be the friend of the main accused.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would vehemently oppose stating that the petitioner is a notorious person, he along with other accused robbed a sum of Rs.25,000/- from the defacto complainant. He would further submit that the petitioner was arrested only 28.07.2020 and he has got four previous cases as follows:
5.Taking into consideration of the submissions so made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and also considering the fact that the petitioner is a notorious element and he has got four previous cases against him and also considering the fact that the petitioner was arrested only on 28.07.2020 and the investigation is in initial stage, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
6.This Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed accordingly.
-sd/14/09/2020
This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned
TRUE COPY
TO
1 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL.
2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SHOLAVARAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT
CC to M/S. P.CHANDRASEKAR Advocate on payment of necessary
charges
CRL OP.14268/2020
Date :14/09/2020
MK:23/09/2020
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of robbery under Section 392 and 397 IPC who has multiple prior cases.
Whether the petitioner's record as a notorious person with four previous cases precludes bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Senthilkumar @ Senthil
State
Inspector of Police, Sholavaram Police Station
A. D. Jagadish Chandira
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
