Madras High CourtCRL OP/13961/2020dismissed

Ettivadi Augustin v. State Rep By,

2020-09-09Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09.09.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.13961 of 2020 Ettivadi Augustin @ Viji ... Petitioner -VsState Rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Polur Prohibition, Enforcement Wing (Polur P.E.W.) Polur Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.

(Crime No.634 of 2020) ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original petition filed under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest pending Crime No.634 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.L.Venkatesan For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

(This case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences publishable under Section 4(1) aaa r/w. 4(1-A) ii of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act and Sections 6 & 7 of R.S.Rules 2000, Crime No.634 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on their routine raid, the respondent police found the petitioner in possession of 1600 liters of ID arrack illegally and thereby, the respondent police registered a case against the petitioner.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the accused Nos.1 and 2 have been arrested and this petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner was found in possession of 1600 liters of ID arrack illegally. He would further submitted that the petitioner is involved in 18 previous cases. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and that the petitioner is involved in 18 previous cases, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

-sd/- 09/09/2020 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, ARNI 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLUR PROHIBITION, ENFORCEMENTWING (POLUR P.E.W) POLUR TALUK, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.S.L.VENKATESAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.13961/2020 Date :09/09/2020 RVR 24/09/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/