V.Saravanakumar v. State Rep By

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.24046 of 2021 V.SARAVANAKUMAR [PETITIONER] Vs STAE REP.BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SAIBABA COLONY POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE CITY.

(CRIME NO.750/2021) For Petitioner : M/S.M.MARUDHACHALAM 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 273, 328 of IPC read with Section 7(1) of POTPA Act in Crime No.750 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 02.12.2021 when the police was on Patrol duty and when they were nearing Aasirvatham Stores, they found that four persons were loading a white plastic bag from a Mini Truck to a two wheeler, and on seeing them, all the four persons were ran away and among the four, the police caught only 3 persons except this petitioner and when enquired about the contents of the bag, he gave contrary statement and when the bag was opened, the Police found "banned tobacco" substances worth about Rs.2 Lakhs were inside, and on further enquiry, the 3 persons submitted their details and the 4th person, who ran away, is the petitioner and the owner of the Mini Truck and the petitioner is owning a Godown and the petitioner used to bring the said substances and deliver the same through the said Truck. Hence the complaint.

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 the property was recovered from the Godown running by the petitioner and 185 kilos of banned tobacco products were seized. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the property was recovered from the Godown running by the petitioner and 185 kilos of banned tobacco products were seized, it needs detail investigation, 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 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SAIBABA COLONY POLICE STATION, COIMBATORE DISTRICT.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

CC to M/S.M.MARUDHACHALAM Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.24046/2021 Date :13/12/2021 CSK 17/12/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/