Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 273, 328
- Tobacco Products Act
Key paragraphs
- Para 66.Considering the previous cases pending against the petitioner and the quantity of the contraband involved in this case, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the…
Judgment
Crl.O.P.No.28506 of 2024 Crl.O.P.No.28506 of 2024A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 273 & 328 of IPC and Section 24(1) of Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act in Crime No.125 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
The case of the prosecution is that, the petitioner along with other accused were found in possession of banned tobacco products( 3000 packets Hans and 4680 packets Vimal and cash Rs.3,64,000/-. Hence, the case.
The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case based on the confession statement of arrested accused. He further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and thus prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Page 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.28506 of 20244. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner would submit that the petitioner along with other accused were found in possession of banned tobacco products worth about Rs.3,50,000/- and cash Rs.3,64,000/- He further submit that, apart from this case, there are three previous cases pending against the petitioner and also submit that, petitioner hails from other state and if anticipatory bail is granted, it would affect the investigation.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record including the FIR.
Operative part
Considering the previous cases pending against the petitioner and the quantity of the contraband involved in this case, this Court is of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.28506 of 20247.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.14.11.2024SmaPage 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.28506 of 2024A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.,SmaCrl.O.P.No.28506 of 202414.11.2024Page 4 of 4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 273, 328; Tobacco Products Act.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.