P.Ranjith v. State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.25585 of 2022 Crl.O.P.No.25585 of 2022 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 24(1) of the Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 and Section 353 of IPC in Crime No.257 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.09.2022 at about 9.00 p.m, during the regular patrol, the respondent police found that the first accused/A1 was in possession of 50 packets of Maava (each packet contains 10 grams) for sale. During further enquiry, the first accused/A1 stated that the petitioner and his wife used to supply the banned tobacco products to the first accused/A1. Based on the confession statement, the respondent police arrayed the petitioner as second accused. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.25585 of 2022 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA , J.

arb/nsa

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that the petitioner is a habitual offender and that there are three previous cases similar in nature, pending against the petitioner. Hence, he vehemently opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into account the nature of offence and the previous antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

20.10.2022 arb/nsa Crl.O.P.No.25585 of 2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis