Sakthi@Sakthivel, v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Nineteenth day of June Two Thousand Fifteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice K.KALYANASUNDARAM CRL OP(MD) No.8953 of 2015 SAKTHI@SAKTHIVEL ... PETITIONER/16th ACCUSED Vs STATE THROUGH THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PROHIBITION OF ENFORCEMENT WING, TIRUNELVELI TOWN POLICE STATION, (CRIME NO.254/2015) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S.P.M.VISHNUVARTHANAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.V.RAJARAJAN,Govt. 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 A16, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 4(1)(aaa) r/w 4(1)(A), 4(1)(g), 4(1)(h), 4(1)(jj), 7, 66 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act and Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 420 of I.P.C. in Crime No.254 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused were found in possession of duplicate brandy bottles and also cash of Rs.1,00,000/-.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and a false case has been foisted against him. He further submitted that on the basis of the confession of the co-accused, he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has no previous case. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) vehemently opposed the bail application stating that this petitioner/A16 has actively participated in the manufacturing of spurious IMFL liquor by using bogus labels, which were purchased from Bangalore and sold them to A4 who in turn, transported the liquor bottles to A5 and A5 sold the same with the help of A2. It is further stated in the counter https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

affidavit of the respondent that they have recovered 5,73 bottles of spurious liquor measuring about 1033.740 litters so far.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side), this Court is of the opinion that the accused are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the criminal original petition is dismissed.

sd/- 19/06/2015 / 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, PROHIBITION OF ENFORCEMENT WING, TIRUNELVELI TOWN POLICE STATION, RL/3C - 24/6/2015

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8953 of 2015 Date :19/06/2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/