Mathan @ Mathan Mohan v. The State Rep.By The Inspector Of Police

CRL OP NO. 1412 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22-01-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 1412 of 2025 Mathan @ Mathan Mohan S/o. Kalaimani, No.2/229, Sivan Kovil Street, Muttam, Agarakeerangudi Village, Mayiladuthurai District 609 401. Petitioner(s) Vs.

The State Rep.By The Inspector Of Police Palaiyur Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District, (Cr.No.09/2025) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): Mr. U Kathiravan For Respondent(s): Mr. S. Santhosh,Government Advocate (Criminal Side).

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 4(1)(A) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition, in Crime No.09 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with other individuals, was found to be in possession of 900 bottles of 180 ml "Shield Pondy Arrack". Hence the case.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person, who has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has no way in connection with the offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court, and therefore, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail.

4. In contrast, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that the petitioner is A2. Out of 900 bottles of " Sheild Pondy Arrack", 100 bottles of Pondy Arrack were seized from the accused/A3. The accused/A2 helped to transport the same. The petitioner has 13 previous cases of a similar in nature pending against him. Therefore, if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, there is a possibility that he will commit a similar offence in the future. A detailed counter has also been filed in this regard.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl Side) for the respondent and perused the entire materials available on record.

6. This is the first application for anticipatory bail. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, as well as bad antecedents of the petitioner, who has 13 previous cases of a similar nature, this Court finds no change in circumstances that would warrant granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 22-01-2025 klt To

1. The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police Palaiyur Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District, Cr.No.09/2025

A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

klt CRL OP NO.1412 of 2025 22-01-2025