Ramesh v. The Assistant Superintendent

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Seventeenth day of June Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Ms.Justice V.M.VELUMANI CRL OP(MD) No.9574 of 2016 RAMESH ... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED-3 Vs STATE REB.BY THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SUCHINDRAM POLICE STATION KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT CR.NO.265 OF 2015 ... RESPONDENT For Petitioner : M/S G.ARAVINTHAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.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, who is arrayed as accused No.3, apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(a) and 24 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 in Crime No.265 of 2016 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that A3 is owner of the bar and A1 and A2 are salesman and Cashier of the bar. At the instigation of the petitioner, A1 and A2 sold the liquor beyond the time fixed by the Government. On complaint, a case has been registered against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner did not instruct other accused to sell the liquor beyond the time limit fixed by the Government and prays for anticipatory bail in favour of the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the Government has taken a Policy decision fixing the time for sale of liquor in shop. The allegation against the petitioner and other accused is that they opened the shop beyond the time limit fixed by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the Government and they have violated the policy condition and prayed for dismissal of this petition.

5.Considering the serious nature of allegations levelled against the petitioner that he violated the time limit for sale of liquor fixed by the Government, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 17/06/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO 1 THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SUCHINDRAM POLICE STATION KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT 2 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

+1. CC to M/S S.R.SATHANBOOPATHY Advocate SR.No.32856

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.9574 of 2016 Date :17/06/2016 SDR/SK-SKN/SAR III/29.06.2016/2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/