Samy@Moorthi v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Fifth day of July Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.11059 of 2016 1 SAMY@MOORTHI 2 ANAND 3 JAYAMURUGAN ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 TO3 Vs STATE REB.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CS CID POLICE STATION TUTICORIN, TUTICORIN DISTRICT.
CR.NO.83 OF 2016 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S N.ANANDAKUMAR Advocate For Respondent : M/S.P.KANNITHEVANGovt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for an alleged offence punishable under Sections 6
(4) of TNSC (RDCS) order of 1982 r/w. 7(1)(a)(ii) of EC Act in Crime No.83 of 2016, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on receiving information that PDS rice has been transported, the respondent Police checked the Lorry bearing Regn. No.TN 38 - AB 7555 and found that PDS rice bag have been concealed in the salt bag. It is further alleged that the petitioners have involved in transporting the PDS rice.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and their names have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are only driver and cleaner of the Lorry and they have no knowledge of the PDS rice in the Lorry and prayed for granting anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioners.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that 9300 kgs of PDS rice was smuggled by the petitioners to sale at
higher price and it was valued about Rs.52,000/- and the investigation of the case is pending. He further submitted that petitioners 2 and 3 are already arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.06.2016 and the first petitioner is having two previous cases and prayed for dismissal of this petition.
5. Since the petitioners 2 and 3 are already arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.06.2016, this petition is dismissed as infructuous against the petitioners 2 and 3. Considering the fact that the first petitioner is having two previous cases, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the first petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
sd/- 05/07/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CS CID POLICE STATION TUTICORIN, TUTICORIN DISTRICT 2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.11059 of 2016 Date :05/07/2016 SDR/ARK-PV/SAR II/15.07.2016/2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/