Manohar Singh v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Fifth day of November Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V.THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.22417 of 2021 MANOHAR SINGH [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SHEVAPET POLICE STATION, SHEVAPET, SALEM DISTRICT.

(CR.NO.306 OF 2021) For Petitioner : M/SC.PRAKASAM Advocate For Respondent : MR.N.S.SUGANTHAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 273, 328, 511 of IPC and Section 57 and 59 of Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and Section 77 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Section 6, 54 (1) of Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Acts 2003, in Cr.No.306 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the respondent police was on regular patrol regarding control of criminal activities near Sathiram in Shevapet, at that time, one Dhandapani was caught hold by the police and he was in possession of two Hans Pocket. After an enquiry, the co-accused in his confession statement stated that he has purchased the above pockets from the Ashapura Store which is owned by the petitioner and thereafter, the respondent police have seized the tobacco products. Hence, the respondent police registered a case against the petitioner.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in no way connected in this case and he further submits that on the date of occurrence, he went to his home town. He further submits that the petitioner has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence prays for grant of anticipatory bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that A1 in this case has been detained under Act 14 of 1982 and there are two previous cases as against the petitioner. He further submits that the quality of tobacco products involved in this case is 311 kgs and it is a commercial quantity. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the quality of tobacco products involved in this case is a commercial quantity and considering the gravity of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the criminal original petition is dismissed. -sd/- 25/11/2021 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, SHEVAPET POLICE STATION, SHEVAPET, SALEM DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to C.PRAKASAM Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.22417/2021 Date :25/11/2021 CSK 02/11/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/