Dhinakaran v. State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.20354 of 2024 P.DHANABAL, J.

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 4 (1) (c), 4 (1)(i), 4(1-A)(ii),24,7 (a) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act of IPC in Crime No.538 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the during regular patrol, the first petitioner was found with a bag containing 10 brandy bottles, each containing 180 ml in the graveyard at Karuvepampoondi. Hence, the complaint.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had not committed any offence as alleged and the petitioners had been falsely implicated in this case and further stated that the first petitioner is working as a Supervisor in the TASMAC and the second petitioner is the Salesman of the TASMAC and he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the first petitioner was found with a bag containing 10 brandy bottles, each containing 180 ml in the graveyard at Karuvepampoondi and further, the properties were seized and also considering the gravity of offence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5.

Considering the representations made by both sides and considering the nature of offences charged against the petitioners and that there is no previous cases as against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions. 6.

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the Learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Uthiramerur on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (each) (Rupees Ten Thousand Only), with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned

and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday, for four weeks.

[b] the petitioners 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 them from disclosing such facts of the Court or to any police officer.

[c] the petitioners shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners 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].

[g] If the petitioners thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

23.08.2024 vca P.DHANABAL, J.

vca Crl.O.P.No.20354 of 2024 23.08.2024