Madras High CourtCRL OP/118/2021dismissed

Suresh v. State By,

2021-01-25Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25.01.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN Crl.O.P.No.118 of 2021 Suresh .. Petitioner Vs.

State represented by .. Respondent Inspector of Police, Ambur Taluk Police Station, Vellore District.

(Crime No.1335 of 2020) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.1335 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ravichandran For Respondent : Mr.S.Karthikeyan Addl. Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner is the sole accused. Apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 7(5), 20(1) of Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act 2003 r/w Sections 279 and 328 of IPC, in Crime No.1335 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, he seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 08.12.2020, the defacto complainant received information that one Tata Ace bearing No.TN 24 AA 9274 met with an accident and when he went to the spot he found that the vehicle was used for transporting 1 tonne of banned tobacco products. The police seized the materials and upon investigation the respondent police registered a case against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent vehemently oppose granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He stated that the petitioner is the owner cum driver of the vehicle in which huge quantity of tobacco products were transported and after the accident the petitioner absconded from the scene of occurrence. He would further submit that there are every chances of him getting absconded and thereby, derailing the progress of trial.

5. Taking into consideration of the fact that the petitioner was transporting huge quantity of banned tobacco products in his own vehicle, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. This Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed accordingly.

-sd/- 25/01/2021 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE DISTRICIT MUNSIF CUM JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, AMBUR.

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VELLORE [FOR INFORMATION].

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMBUR TALUK POLICE STATION, VELLORE DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.S.RAVICHANDRAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.118/2021 Date :25/01/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ MN-08/02/2021