Madras High CourtCRL OP/24095/2021dismissed

Rajasekar v. The State Rep.By

2021-12-13Honourable Mrs Justice T.V.Thamilselvi2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Thirteenth day of December Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.24095 of 2021 RAJASEKAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP.BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEW, RASIPURAM, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT.

(CR.NO.619 OF 2008) For Petitioner : M/S.A.S. PRABU 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 4(1)-(aaa) r/w a(1)-A TNP Act r/w 66 of the TN Excise Act r/w under Section 468, 471 and 420 IPC r/w under Section 511 IPC in S.C.No.13 of 2013 in Crime No.619 of 2008, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on enquiry it is revealed that A2 received the forged labels and coloring materials from A6 through A5. In this connection the respondent police filed charge sheet and the petitioner is appearing before the Court for the past 13 years without fail but on 21.10.2021 due to petitioner illness, the petitioner could not able to appear before the trial Court and informed his counsel for filing petition under Section 317 Cr.P.C but his counsel not filed petition and hence the trial Court cancelled his sureties and issued NBW against the petitioner. Hence this Case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that all the accused did not appear before the trial Court for enquiry and to drag the proceedings. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the petitioner abusing the process of Court, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. -sd/- 13/12/2021 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, PEW, RASIPURAM, NAMAKKAL DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.A.S. PRABU Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.24095/2021 Date :13/12/2021 CSK 21/12/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/