Raju v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 02.09.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.OP.No.13447 of 2020 Raju S/o. Jayaraman ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by Inspector of Police, PEW Thiruthuraipoondi Police Station, Thiruvarur District, Crime No.671 of 2020.

... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.671 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.Swamisubramanian For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohammad Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(This case has been heard through video conference) The Petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the Respondent Police, for having allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(a) r/w 4(1-A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, in Crime No.671 of 2020, has filed this Criminal Original Petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the Prosecution as per the defacto complainant is that on the usual raid of the respondent police, the petitioner was found in possession of 10 litres of ID arrack. Hence, the complaint was registered.

3. This Court heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Respondent and also perused the materials placed before this Court.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, while opposing to grant anticipatory bail, would submit that the Petitioner was found in possession of 10 litres of ID arrack without any valid licence. He further submitted that there are four previous cases of similar nature against the petitioner.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel and the fact that there are four previous cases of similar nature against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 02/09/2020 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUTHURAIPOONDI,THIRUVARUR DISTRICT 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEW THIRUTHURAIPOONDI POLICE STATION, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.SWAMISUBRAMANIAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.13447/2020 Date :02/09/2020 RD 14/09/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/