Madras High CourtCRL OP/24249/2019dismissed

Kutti@ Kuttiamma v. State Rep.By

2019-09-13Honourable Mr Justice C.V. Karthikeyan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Thirteenth day of September Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice C.V. KARTHIKEYAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.24249 of 2019 KUTTI @ KUTTIAMMA [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] INSPECTOR OF POLICE (L AND O), N4 FISHING HARBOUR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

CR.NO.220/2019.

For Petitioner : M/S.S.SENTHIL KUMAR Advocate For Respondent : MR. T.SHUNMUGARAJESWARAN, Govt. Advocate O/O PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 8(c), r/w Sec.20(b)(ii) (B) of NDPS Act in Crime No.220 of 2019, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 24.08.2019, on receipt of a secret information, when the Sub Inspector of Police had gone near Bhavaniamman Temple backside, New Washermenpet, he found two suspicious persons standing there and on seeing the respondent police, they tried to run away from the said place and they were said to be found in possession of 1300 kgms of Ganja. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has no way connected with the alleged offence. He further submitted that on the confession statement given by the co-accused, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner along with another found in possession of 1300 kgms of Ganja. He further submitted that there are two accused persons involved in the crime in which the petitioner is arrayed as A2. A1 was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

The petitioner is the wife of A1. He further submitted that three previous cases pending against the petitioner herein and hence he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration the allegations and also the bad antecedent of the petitioner and the fact that the case is in the initial stage of the investigation and that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 13/09/2019 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 PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

2 INSPECTOR OF POLICE (L AND O), N4 FISHING HARBOUR POLICE STATION, CHENNAI.

CC to M/S.S.SENTHIL KUMAR Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR.NO.19105 CRL OP.24249/2019 Date :13/09/2019 RVR 24/09/2019 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/