Prabhu v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Twenty Ninth day of June Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.10209 of 2016 PRABHU ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.4 Vs THE STATE REP BY ITS THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KODAIKANAL POLICE STATION DINDIGUL DISTRICT (CRIME NO.185 OF 2016) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.M.JEGADEESH PANDIAN, Advocate For Respondent : M/S.P.KANNITHEVAN, 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.4, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act, 1985, in Crime No.185 of 2016, on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 30.04.2016, on information, the respondent police inspected the place near Annasalai GTS Complex, Chinnasamy Petty Shop and on seeing the police, four persons ran away from the scene of occurrence. The respondent police caught hold A.1 and A.2 and found 2.500 Kgs of ganja in their possession and a sum of Rs.6,200/-. On complaint case has been registered for the above said offences. 3.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He is a friend of A.1 and due to that he has been falsely implicated in this case on the confession of A.1 and A.2. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) submitted that when the respondent police went to the place of occurrence, the petitioner along with A.3 ran away from the place of occurrence and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the respondent police arrested A.1 and A.2 and found 2.500 Kgs of ganja in their possession.

There is no previous case pending against the petitioner. Investigation is pending.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering involvement of the petitioner in the crime and also serious nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and accordingly this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 29/06/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 2.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KODAIKANAL POLICE STATION DINDIGUL DISTRICT RL/3C/1P/ARK/PV/SARII/4/7/2016 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10209 of 2016 Date :29/06/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/