D. Murali @ Manikandan v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15/05/2024 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice P. VADAMALAI
1. Murali @ Manikandan
2. Vinoth @ Vinothkumar ... Petitioners/Accused Nos.7 & 9 Vs The Inspector of Police, PEW - Sivagangai Police Station, Sivagangai District.
(Crime No. 212 of 2024).
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : Mr. Muthurakkan.K., Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 212 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police. 1/4
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/accused 7 and 9, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 471 and 420 IPC, 4 (1)(aa) and 4(1-A) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act and 5, 6 and 8 of Tamil Nadu Rectified Sprit Rules, 2000 in Crime No.212 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 29.03.2024 at 2.30 p.m., when the defacto complainant along with their team was on patrol, one Muthukumar (A1) drove the car and illegally transported liquor bottles. The respondent police enquired Accused No.1 and he confessed that the petitioner and other accused persons are illegally manufactured spurious liquor and running a liquor factory and the respondent police recovered 5,550 bottles. Hence, the case has been registered against the petitioners in Crime No.212 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 4(1)(aa), 4(1-A) of Tamilnadu Prohibition Act and Sections 468, 471 and 420 of IPC and Sections 5, 6, 8 of the Tamilnadu Rectified Spirit Rules, 2000.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and his name has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further 2/4
submit that the petitioner will never abscond and will not tamper the witnesses and also ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court and hence, he seeks to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that totally there are 14 accused. Except the petitioners, all the other accused were arrested and they are still in custody. He would further submit that the petitioners and other accused were running a spurious liquor factory and totally 5400 liquor bottles worth about Rs.10,00,000/- were seized and he raised strong objection to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Considering the nature and gravity of offence and also the fact that all the other accused were arrested and they are still in custody, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners at this stage.
6. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 15/05/2024 / TRUE COPY / /05/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.I /II /III /IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
MM 3/4
TO THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PEW- SIVAGANGAI POLICE STATION, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT.
THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.7275 of 2024 Date :15/05/2024 PKP/GS/SAR /22.05.2024/ 4P/ 3C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4