Mani @ Maniyammal v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

CRL OP(MD). No.7527 of 2020 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 19/08/2020 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.BHARATHIDASAN CRL OP(MD). No.7527 of 2020 Mani @ Maniyammal ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State repl by The Sub Inspector of Police, Sedapatty Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.883 of 2020) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muniyandi, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.K.K.Ramakrishnan, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.883 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- Totally there are two accused in this case. The petitioner, who is arrayed as A2, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under sections 8(c) r/w Section 20 (b) (ii) (B) of NDPS Act, 1985, in Crime No.883 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that A1 in this case was found in possession of 1.500 kgs of Ganja and on the confession of A1, it is seen that the petitioner is a main supplier of Ganja. Hence, the crime has been registered.

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

CRL OP(MD). No.7527 of 2020 that the petitioner is an innocent person and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that based on the confession statement of A1, the petitioner has been implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police submitted that in the investigation it reveals that the petitioner is a main supplier and she is having five previous cases of similar in nature. Hence, he prayed to dismiss this petition.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the rival submissions on either side and on perusal of the records, it is seen that though there is no recovery from the petitioner she is the main supplier of Ganja and she is habitual offender and she is having five previous cases of similar in nature, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7.Accordingly, this criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 19/08/2020 / TRUE COPY / / /2020 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

vsg Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

TO 1 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE SEDAPATTY POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT.

2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.7527 of 2020 Date :19/08/2020 KM:RSK-SAR3 (24.08.2020) 2P 3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2