High CourtsSingle Bench(2022) 09 MAD CK 0061

Madhanbabu vs State

Madras High Court · Decided on 15 September 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
A.D.Jagadish Chandira, J
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Original Petition No.22178 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 673 words

A.D.Jagadish Chandira, J

1.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.08.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 272, 273, 328 IPC, 77 of JJ Act, 2015 and Section 7 r/w 9(ii) of TNPSS Act,2002 r/w 6(a)(b) & 24(1) of TN Cotpa Act, in Crime No.227 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that on 23.08.2022, when the respondent police were on their regular Patrol, the petitioner was found in possession of banned tobacco products namely, 28 Hans pockets, 28 Vimal pan masala pockets and 33 V-I Tobacco products. The respondent police arrested the petitioner and seized the banned tobacco products. Hence the complaint.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner. However, he would also submit that without prejudice to his contentions, the petitioner is prepared to deposit a considerable amount to any Welfare Scheme of the Government. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner was found in possession of banned tobacco products namely, 28 Hans pockets, 28 Vimal pan masala pockets and 33 V-I Tobacco products. The respondent police arrested the petitioner and seized the banned tobacco products. He would also submit that there are no previous cases as against the petitioner. However, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5.

Heard both the learned counsel and perused the materials available on record.

6.

In order to curb the illegal activities of selling banned tobacco products, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.4,000/- (Rupees Four thousand only) as non refundable deposit to "the Dean/Medical Officer, District Head Quarter Government Hospital, Thiruvallur District" without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court.

7.

Merely, because the petitioner deposits the said amount, it would not amount to admission of his guilt. Therefore, it is open to the trial Court to deal with the case independently.

8.

Taking into consideration the facts of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner has prepared to deposit Rs.4,000/- to any welfare scheme of the Government, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

9.

Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.4,000/- (Rupees Four thousand only) by way of Demand Draft/RTGS/NEFT to the "Dean/Medical Officer, District Head Quarter Government Hospital, Thiruvallur District", without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court, on such deposit and production of proof, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond each for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Thiruvallur and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC;