Madras High CourtCRL OP/6292/2021dismissed

J.Prakash v. State Rep By

2021-03-30Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Thirtieth day of March Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice V.BHARATHIDASAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.6292 of 2021 J.PRAKASH [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAMPULIYUR POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT.

CRIME NO.43/2021 For Petitioner : M/S.M.VENKATESAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.S.KARTHIKEYAN Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

ORDER

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who apprehends arrest in connection with the case in Crime No.43 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police for the alleged offence u/s 379 and 430 of IPC and Section 21(1) of The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and also perused the records carefully.

3. The allegation of the prosecution is that a bullock car was found transporting 1/4 unit of river sand. It was intercepted and the driver escaped from the spot and the father of the driver was caught red handed. The petitioner is alleged to have driven the bullock cart. Alleging commission of various offences, crime was registered and the petitioner apprehends arrest.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offence and this case has been foisted only for the statistical purpose. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this court for granting anticipatory bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would stoutly oppose the petition for anticipatory bail. He would further submit that the petitioner is having three cases of similar nature to his credit.

6. Considering the nature of the offence and also the alleged involvement of the petitioner in three other cases of similar nature, this court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case for the grant of anticipatory bail as there is every possibility of repeating the offence by the petitioner, if he is released on anticipatory bail. Thus, the Criminal Original Petition deserves only to be dismissed and the same is dismissed accordingly. -sd/- 30/03/2021 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 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

2.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADAMPULIYUR POLICE STATION, CUDDALORE DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.M.VENKATESAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.6292/2021 Date :30/03/2021 TK/20.04.2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/