Allowed

M.Sarfudeen v. State Rep. by

Madras HC18 Jun 2021CRL OP/7327/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a second anticipatory bail appeal filed by a petitioner accused of supplying banned tobacco products under the Juvenile Justice Act and COTPA. Despite a prior dismissal, bail was granted due to co-accused release and nearing investigation closure, subject to strict conditions including daily police appearance and a monetary bond.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail in event of arrest subject to bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, daily police appearance, and strict compliance with other conditions listed.

M.Sarfudeen Vs State Rep. by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 18.06.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.7327 of 2021

M.Sarfudeen

.. Petitioner/A5

Vs.

State represented by Inspector of Police, B2, Shevapet Police Station, Salem city, Salem - 636 002. (Crime No.1259 of 2020) .. Respondent

¶10

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.1259 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Vasudevan

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.C.E.Pratap G.A.(Crl.Side)

¶13

¶14

O R D E R (The case has been heard through video conference)

¶15

This is the second anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner/A5, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Section 77 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 & Sections 6, 24(1) of Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003, in Crime No.1259 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶16

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had supplied the banned Tobacco Products (200 Bundles of Hans Chaap Tobacco-30 bags, 50 Bundles of Hans-4, 200 and 400 Bundles-Vimal Panmasala-30 bags, 100 Bundles of Takkar Pan Masala Strong -30 bags, Cool Lip Fillter Tobacco 30 bundles of 3 bags, 100 bundles of TS Chewing Tobacco of 30 bags, 400 bundles of V-1 Tobacco -30 bags, 25 bundles of RMD Pan Masala -60 bags, 7 M-Saccend tobacco Gold 60 bags) illegally. Hence, the complaint was registered.

¶17

Earlier, this Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner on 08.02.2021, considering the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that all the co-accused were arrested and released on bail and the banned goods were recovered from the other accused. He further submitted that the investigation is almost over and that this is the second anticipatory bail application.

¶19

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) strongly opposed the granting of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He submitted that the earlier anticipatory bail application moved by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 08.02.2021, in Crl.O.P.No.20657 of 2020.

¶20

Hear both sides.

¶21

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the co-accused were arrested and released on bail, banned goods were recovered from the accused and the investigation is almost over, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

¶22

(a) Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Salem, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶23

(b) 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.

¶24

¶25

(d) The petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶26

(e) The petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶27

(f) 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 petitioners 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 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ SCW 5560].

¶28

(g) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

¶29

With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.

¶30

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶31

TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.III, SALEM. 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE SALEM [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, SALEM. 4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, B2, SHEVAPET POLICE STATION, SALEM CITY, SALEM-636 002.

¶32

5 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶33

+1CC to M/S. B.VASUDEVAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges SR NO.6650

¶34

MK:02/07/2021

¶35

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

M.Sarfudeen v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Sarfudeen v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Subramani Vs The District Collector

S.Ramasamy Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Mohan Babu Vs The District Revenue officer

Keeraimani @ Manikandan Vs the State Rep.by

V.Revathi Vs The National Highway Authority

Arunkumar Vs State Rep.by