Jayakumar v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Eighth day of December Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mrs Justice T.V. THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.23343 & 23345 of 2021 JAYAKUMAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED IN BOTH PETITIONS ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IN CRL.O.P.Nos.23343/2021 ] P.E.W., MAYILADUTHURAI POLICE STATION, MAYILADUTHURAI DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.1178 OF 2021) THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, IN CRL.O.P.Nos.23345/2021 ] P.E.W., NAGAPATTINAM POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.1783 OF 2021) For Petitioner : M/S.M.VINOTH Advocate [IN BOTH PETITIONS] For Respondent : MR.N.S.SUGANTHAN, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) [IN BOTH PETITIONS] PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner in both Crl.OPs who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.10.2021 for the offences under Sections 4(1) (aaa) r/w 4(1-A) of TNP Act and Section 5 and 6 of Tamil Nadu Rectified Spirit Rules, in Crime Nos.1178 and and 1783 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that when the respondent conducting regular vehicle checking, they found that the petitioner along with other accused had illegally transported 735 litres of ID Arrack by using Mahendra Bolero in Cr.No.1178/2021 of PEW,

Mayilduthurai and the petitioner was in illegal possession of 465 litres of illicit arrack in Cr.No.1783 of 2021 of PEW, Nagapattinam and the respondent police arrested the petitioner and remanded to judicial custody and also seized the said vehicle. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is no way connected with the alleged offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 40 and 34 days from 29.10.2021 and 15.11.2021 in both Crime Numbers and hence, he would pray for grant of bail to the petitioners. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would raise strong objection stating that there are many cases pending against the petitioner in various Police Stations of Tamilnadu and he was detained under Goondas Act ie., Tamilnadu Act 14 of 1982. 5.Considering the fact that the petitioner was detained under Goondas and he has got several previous cases, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are dismissed. -sd/- 08/12/2021 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, P.E.W., MAYILADUTHURAI POLICE STATION, MAYILADUTHURAI DISTRICT.

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, P.E.W., NAGAPATTINAM POLICE STATION, NAGAPATTINAM DISTRICT.

2 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, DISTRICT JAIL, NAGAPATTINAM.

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.M.VINOTH Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.23343 & 23345/2021 Date :08/12/2021 JPA 29/12/2021