Mani@Kurutumani v. State Rep By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.09.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.OP.No.14194 of 2020 Mani @ KurutuMani ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep. By its The Inspector of Police, Cheyyar PEW Police Station, Thiruvannamalai.

(Cr. No.477 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 his arrest in Crime No.477 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Srinivasan 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 the alleged offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(i), 4(1)(aaa), r/w 4(1-A) (ii) of TNP Act in Crime No.1 of 2019, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found to illegally possession of 120 liters of ID Arrack and on seeing the respondent police the petitioner ran away.

3. 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. Further he submits that it is the second petition filed by the petitioner seeking anticipatory bail. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that this Court by order dated 26.08.2020 dismissed the earlier application in Crl. OP No.13019 of 2020 with an observation that the petitioner is an habitual offender and there are eight https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

previous cases of similar nature pending against him. Out of which, two cases have been registered very recently in the year 2020. It is also submitted that during the course of further investigation, the respondent have received the chemical analysis report and it is found that the petitioner has sold illicit liquor containing 6.1% VV Atropine which is a poisonous substance and hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.Taking into consideration the facts and submissions made by the learned counsels and also considering the fact that the petitioner is an habitual offender and more so, the earlier petition has been very recently dismissed on 26.08.2020 observing that the petitioner has got eight previous cases and it is seen that the subsequent petition has been filed immediately on 7.09.2020, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

-sd/- 11/09/2020 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, VANDAVASI 2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHEYYAR PEW POLICE STATION, THIRUVANNAMALAI.

CC to M/S.C.SRINIVASAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.14194/2020 Date :11/09/2020 GKS:25/09/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/