Senthoorpandi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Fifteenth day of June Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.8663 of 2016 1 SENTHOORPANDI 2 MUTHURAMALINGAM ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED RANK NOT KNOWN Vs STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PERAIYUR POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO.40 OF 2016) ... RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S V.MALAIYENDRAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.K.ANBARASAN, Government Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused, apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 25(1-B)(b) Arms Act @ 30 Arms Act, in Crime No.40 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant who is the Election Officer on 14.03.2016 along with other official while checking vehicle in Car bearing Regn.No.TN 09G 2497 it was found 3 swords and knife and the driver of the vehicle was arrested and he confessed that the weapons were kept by the petitioners and other accused. On complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioners.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that on confession of driver of vehicle, the petitioners were arrayed as accused and he belongs to particular political party and the name of the petitioners names have been falsely implicated in this case and prays for anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioners.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that on the instigation of the petitioners, the deadly weapons were carried to commit offence and investigation of the case is pending. He further submitted that the earlier petition filed by the petitioners in Crl.O.P(MD).No.8070 of 2016 was dismissed by this Court on 19.05.2016 and there is no change of circumstances and if the petitioners are granted anticipatory bail, they will abscond and tamper and evidence and hamper the investigation and prayed for dismissal of this petition.

5.Considering the serious nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners and that the earlier petition filed by the petitioners dismissed on 19.05.2016 and there is no change of circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 15/06/2016 / 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 PERAIYUR POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

+1. CC to M/S V.MALAIYENDRAN Advocate SR.No.30668 RL/4C/2P/SKS/RR/SARIII/21/6/2016

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8663 of 2016 Date :15/06/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/