Dhanarajan v. State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police

CRL OP NO. 880 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20.01.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 880 of 2025 Dhanarajan petitioner(s) Vs The Inspector Of Police, Magudanchavadi Police Station, Salem District.

Respondent(s) For petitioner(s):

T.N.Rangesh Kanna For Respondent(s):

S.Santhosh Government Advocate (criminal Side).

ORDER

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.270 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Section 7(1), 7(3) of Lotteries Regulation Act and 318 of BNS, 2023, 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 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 may be imposed by this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in a connected case in Crime No.376 of 2024, the

petitioner was granted anticipatory bail and at that time, it was informed that there are only three previous cases as against the petitioner. 3.The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that A1 to A3 selling banned Kerala Lottery tickets, for which they collected Rs.4,720/- from various persons. A1 to A3 were arrested and released on bail, based on the confession made by the arrested accused, the petitioner/A4 herein has been roped in this case. He further submit that the petitioner is a habitual offender and he has got 11 previous cases, out of which he has been acquitted in one case. He would further submit that on an earlier occasion, wrong information had been given that the petitioner has got only three previous cases, however, on verification it is found that the petitioner has got 11 previous cases of similar nature.

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 grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 20-01-2025 ah To 1.The Inspector Of Police, Magudanchavadi Police Station, Salem District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

ah CRL OP NO.880 of 2025 20.01.2025