Madras High CourtCRL OP/15310/2020dismissed

Jinnah v. State Rep. By

2020-09-29Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 29.09.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.15310 of 2020 Jinnah ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, R-8, Vadapalani Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.423/2020) ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.423 of 2020 on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vinoth For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(The 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 6 (a) and 24 (1) of Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 r/w. Section 328 of IPC in Crime No.423 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused was found in possession of 215 Kg of Tobacco products. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the petitioner was illegally found in possession of 215 Kg of Tobacco Products. He would further submit that there are two previous cases pending as against the petitioner, which are similar in nature and he would further submit that the petitioner has got anticipatory bail in those cases and again indulged in similar activities. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the petitioner has two previous cases are similar in nature and he got anticipatory bail and again he has indulged in similar acitvities, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 29/09/2020 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 METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE NO.XVII, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, R-8, VADAPALANI POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

CC to M/S. M.VINOTH Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.15310/2020 Date :29/09/2020 MK:08/10/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/