Venkatesan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Fifteenth day of December Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL OP(MD) No.17307 of 2017 VENKATESAN ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED No.2 Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PROHIBITION AND ENFORCEMENT WING KUMBAKONAM, THANJAVUR DISTRICT CR NO. 455/2017. RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : Mr.A.RAHUL 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/Accused No.2, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 4 (1)(aaa), 4(1) r/w 4(1-A) of TNP Act, in Crime No.

455 of 2017, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused illegally transported 839 numbers of various kinds of liquor bottles and 105 litres I.D. Arrack in vehicle Nos.TN 68 H-590 and TN 68 9685, thereby the Law Enforcing Agency recovered the furious articles and attested A1. However, this petitioner has escaped from the clutches of Law Enforcing Agency. Accordingly, the respondent police registered this case against the petitioner. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Only based on the confession of the accused No.1, this petitioner was implicated in this case. 4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) would submit that already three previous cases are pending against this petitioner and petitioner was declared as history sheeted roudy. 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 view that if the petitioner is enlarged on the anticipatory bail, it will encourage the petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.

to involve in further illegal activities in future. Therefore, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

sd/- 15/12/2017 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PROHIBITION AND ENFORCEMENT WING KUMBAKONAM, THANJAVUR DISTRICT 2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI JAM/27.12.17/CM/ SAR 3 / 2P-3C

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.17307 of 2017 Date :15/12/2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/