Murugan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Fifth day of November Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.20841 of 2015 MURUGAN ..PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.2 Vs.

STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE P.E.W. MADURAI CITY.

CR NO.911/2015 ..RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S P.BALAN Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.ANBARASAN, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as accused No.2, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(aaa), 4(1)(AAA) and Section 24 of TNP Act in Crime No.911 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 27.10.2015, the respondent police conducted a raid near Muniyandipuram. At that time, A1 came in an auto and he was found in possession of 42 boxes of IMFL Liquor and the same was seized. The petitioner is the owner of the bar attached to the TASMAC shop and that there was a local holiday for TASMAC shops from 26.10.2015 to 30.10.2015, and that A1 is a salesman of the TASMAC shop. Therefore, the complaint has given and FIR was registered in crime No.911 of 2015 for the alleged offences as stated above. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner produced a copy of the order dated 04.11.2015 in Crl.M.P.No.7182 of 2015, stating that A1 has already arrested and enlarged on bail.

He would further submit that the petitioner is innocent person and he has not committed any offence and prays for anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner. 4.Heard the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side). 5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the petitioner is the owner of the bar and A1 has already arrested and enlarged on bail and also taking into consideration of the nature of the offence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate VI, Madurai and on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.

10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.

comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously.

6.The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date on which the order copy made ready, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. sd/- 05/11/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.VI, MADURAI.

2 -do-thro'THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,MADURAI. 3 THE ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,MADURAI. 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, P.E.W., MADURAI CITY. +1. CC to M/S P.BALAN Advocate SR.No.65202 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.20841 of 2015 Date :05/11/2015 PBK/AMF/SAR-II 06/11/2015 ::2P-6C::

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