S.Jayalakshmi v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Nineteenth day of May Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.11587 of 2022 S.JAYALAKSHMI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, P-6 KODUNGAIYUR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

(CRIME NO.3204/2021) For Petitioner : M/S.A.SETHURAMAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.DAMODARAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences publishable under Sections 8(c) & 20(b)(ii)(B) of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in Crime No.3204 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. This is the third anticipatory bail application. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused were in trade of Ganja. On 05.12.2021, based on the secret information, when the police team went to the place of occurrence, the petitioner and other accused fled away from the scene of crime. When the premises of the A1 was searched, one accused was arrested and 1.500 kgs of Ganja was recovered.. Hence, the case was registered as against the petitioner and others.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this is the 5th anticipatory bail petition and earlier applications in Crl.O.P.No.3993 of 2022 was dismissed on 02.03.2022, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Crl.O.P.No.7369 of 2022 was dismissed on 30.03.2022. He would further submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and she has nothing to do with the offence and hence, he sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there is no change in circumstances in this case, after the dismissal of the earlier applications. He would further submit that the petitioner is an habitual offender and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much essential in this case. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner and the fact that there is no change of circumstances in this case, after dismissal of the earlier applications, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 19/05/2022 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 INSPECTOR OF POLICE, P-6 KODUNGAIYUR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.A.SETHURAMAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.11587/2022 Date :19/05/2022 CSK 26/05/2022 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/