Mr Kailash v. State Rep By Its
P. DHANABAL, J.
The petitioner / accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 328 of BNS r/w.20(2) of Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act, 2003, in Crime No.41 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner's vehicle was found in possession of tobacco products worth around Rs.2,50,000/- Hence the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is innocent and he has not involved in the offences as alleged by the prosecution and the respondent police had falsely implicated him in this case. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondent would submit that on enquiry it was found that one Prem Kumar is the owner of the alleged car and he had mortgaged the said car to the petitioner and the petitioner in turn used the car for selling tobacco 1/6
products. He further submit that the value of contraband is worth Rs.2,50,000/-. He would further submit that there are no previous case against the petitioner. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the nature of offences and considering the quantity of material involved in this case and also considering the fact that there are no previous cases against the petitioner, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pappireddippatti, Dharmapuri District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: 2/6
[a] the petitioner shall report before the Inspector of Police, Krishnagiri Police Station, Krishnagiri District on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;
[b] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
[c] the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].
3/6
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.
22.08.2024 bkn 4/6
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Pappireddippatti, Dharmapuri District
2. The Inspector of Police, D-1, Anna Squre Police Station, Chennai.
3. The Inspector of Police, Krishnagiri Police Station, Krishnagiri District.
4.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
5/6
P.DHANABAL, J.
bkn CRL OP.No.20155 of 2024 22.08.2024 6/6