K. Mukundan@Nazar v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Fourth day of November Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.20918 of 2015 K. MUKUNDAN @ NAZAR ... PETITIONER / PETITIONER. Vs THE STATE REB.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PROHIBITION ENFORCEMENT WING, THIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT.

(IN CR.NO. 101/2015) ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S P.SENGUTTARASAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.ANBARASAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who arrayed as accused No.7, in Crime No.101 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(aaa), 4(1)(A) of TNP Act and Sections 120(b), 465, 468 and 471 of IPC r/w Section 6 and 7 of TNRS Rules, 2000 and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on reliable information, vehicles have been searched by the respondent Police at Kallikudi Checkpost and at that point of time, the vehicle of A1 was searched and found spirit in the vehicle and the same was seized. A2 and A3 were arrested who were travelling in the vehicle and on the basis of the confession of A2, A1 was arrested, who is the owner of the vehicle. A2 is the driver of the vehicle and hence a complaint has been lodged against them and a case has been registered for the offences as stated supra. 3.The case of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and the Petitioner's name is not found in the First Information Report and only on the confession of the other accused, the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case.

4.The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) on instructions would submit that A1 to A5 were detained under Goondas Act and A6 was already arrested and enlarged on bail https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5.The learned counsel for the Petitioner would further submit that the detention order passed against the accused Nos.1 to 5 was set aside by this Court.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, 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,Thirumangalam 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. and 5.00 p.m. until further orders. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C. scrupulously. 7.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/- 24/11/2015 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THIRUMANGALAM 2 DO THRO THE CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MADURAI DISTRICT 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PROHIBITION ENFORCEMENT WING, THIRUMANGALAM, MADURAI DISTRICT.

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT MADURAI +1. CC to M/S P.SENGUTTARASAN Advocate SR.No. 67466.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.20918 of 2015 Date :24/11/2015 AM/25.11.2015/AAL.MPA/SAR-I/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/