← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/31555/2024dismissed

G.Venkatesan v. State By, The Inspector Of Police,

2024-12-17Honourable Mr Justice A.D.Jagadish Chandira4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-12-2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 31555 of 2024 G.Venkatesan S/o.Govindasamy, 4/193, Chinnur, Kandili, Tirupathur Dt 635 852.

Petitioner(s) Vs State By, The Inspector Of Police, Kandili Police Station, Tirupathur District.

Cr.No.603 Of 2024 Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

KARUMUGAM G.Munuraj H.Monesh Kumar For Respondent(s): Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 356(e) and 326(a) of BNS in Crime No.603 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, while the respondent police were on their routine check up near Anna Nagar, they intercepted a lorry 1/4

bearing Registration No.TN-54-P-7419 and found that the petitioner along with co-accused were in illegal possession of two units of ordinary sand. Hence, this case.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to produce solvent sureties and to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and also undertake to appear and to co-operate for the investigation, therefore, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed for granting of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, stating that the co-accused and the petitioner were involved in illegal transportation of 2 units of ordinary sand. He further submitted that the petitioner has 4 previous cases.

5.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record including the FIR. 2/4

6.

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case and the petitioner herein has 4 previous cases, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. 17.12.2024 stn To

1. State By, The Inspector Of Police, Kandili Police Station, Tirupathur District.

Cr.No.603 Of 2024 A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

stn 3/4

Crl.O.P. No.31555 of 2024 17.12.2024 4/4