Dismissed

Jesus @ Rajendiran v. State Repby

Madras HC23 Sept 2022CRL OP/21211/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused bail to the petitioner in a case concerning robbery, snatching, and criminal intimidation. The Court noted the petitioner was a habitual offender with nine prior serious cases, including murder and offences under the Explosive Substances Act, and dismissed the bail petition.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed. Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed for the present.

Jesus @ Rajendiran Vs State Repby — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.21211 of 2022

¶2

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

¶3

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.08.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 392 r/w 397 and 506(ii) of IPC, in Crime No.261 of 2022, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶4

The case of the prosecution is that on 14.08.2022 at 10.00

¶5

a.m., the petitioner along with the other accused waylaid the defacto complainant and at knife point, had snatched an amount of Rs.5,000/- from the shirt pocket of the defacto complainant. Hence the complaint.

¶6

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit

¶7

that since, the petitioner is innocent and the petitioner and the other accused persons have been falsely implicated in this case. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶8

1/4

¶9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶10

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for

¶11

the respondent would submit that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he has got 9 previous cases including one murder case and one under Explosive Substances Act. He would also submit that the petitioner is a history sheeted rowdy in Rowdy H.S.No.457 of 2008 on the file of the respondent police. The previous cases against the petitioner are listed hereunder:-

¶12

*Sl.No*	_Police Station _	*Crime No.*	*Offences*
1	B-5	45/2015	147, 148, 341, 427, 452, 307, 302, 506(ii) of IPC
2	C-2	74/2016	147, 148, 307 of IPC and 27 of Arms Act r/w 3 of Explosive Act.
3	C-1	93/2016	147, 148, 392 r/w 397, 427, 506(ii) of IPC
4	B-5	317/2017	147, 341, 294(b), 323, 324, 307, 506(ii) of IPC
5	B-5	318/2017	147, 341, 392, 397 of IPC.
6	B-5	376/2018	143 of IPC & 7(1)(a) of CLA Act.
7	B-5	41/2019	7(1)(a) of CLA Act. (15.02.2019)
8	B-5	96/2019	7(1)(a) of CLA Act. (04.04.2019)
9	B-5	358/2020	147, 341, 294(b), 323, 307 of IPC.

¶13

Heard both the learned Counsel and perused the materials

¶14

2/4

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

available on record.

¶17

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the

¶18

case, the submissions made by the learned counsel and also taking note of

¶19

the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he has got 9 previous

¶20

cases against him, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶21

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed

for the present.

23.09.2022

rgi

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶28

rgi

¶29

Crl.O.P.No.21211 of 2022

¶30

23.09.2022

¶31

4/4

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Jesus @ Rajendiran v. State Repby

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jesus @ Rajendiran v. State Repby

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.Sajith Ahamed Vs State Rep by

Siva Suriya Vs the State

Udayakumar Vs State Rep by

D.Syed Rohid Vs State Rep.by

Govindaraj Vs State Rep by

Ameeran Vs State by the Inspector of Police