G. BALASUBRAMANIAN Vs. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEENBURITTY POLICE STATION, PERAMBALUR DISTRICT, CRIME NO. 220/22007

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent / Police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 324 and 302 r/w 120 (B) IPC in Crime No. 220 of 2007

(2.) THE Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's name does not find place in the FIR and he is implicated on the charge of conspiracy, but the occurrence had taken place only after a sudden quarrel and as such there could be no conspiracy earlier to the occurrence. The Statement of witnesses in respect of the conspiracy were recorded three days after the occurrence and they area false witnesses. The learned counsel further submitted that though the earlier petition was dismissed, subsequently some of the accused were arrested and were released on bail and while releasing the accused on bail in Crl. O.P. No. 36744 of 2007, it is observed that "the learned Government Advocate submits that the investigation is almost over"

(3.) THE Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the decision rendered by the Full Bench of the Rajasthan High Court reported in : 2005 Cri. L.J. 2086 (Ganesh Raj v. State of Rajasthan and Others). The question that was referred to the Full Bench for consideration was "Whether second or subsequent bail application under Section 438 Cr. P.C. is maintainable or not" while considering the question, the Full Bench of the Rajasthan High Court referred to number of decisions wherein the second anticipatory bail application was held not maintainable and also where the anticipatory bail was found to be maintenance While so, some of the reference made are as follows: -