Allowed

Ketan Laxmidas Majithia v. the State Rep by

Madras HC11 Oct 2022CRL OP/21985/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Single Judge Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who faced charges under the TN Prevention of Terrorism and ITBP Act and IPC related to illicit arrack transport. The petitioner was directed to deposit Rs.1 lakh and comply with various stringent conditions including residence proof and police reporting.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail subject to depositing Rs.1,00,000/- and complying with specific conditions regarding residence proof, police reporting, and execution of surety bond.

Ketan Laxmidas Majithia Vs the State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.21985 of 2022

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.21985 of 2022

¶3

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶4

The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(aaa), 4(1-A), 5, 7(a) of T.N.P Act read with 7 of TN RS Rules 2000 and Sections 328, 120(b), 465 and 468 of IPC in Crime No.244 of 2021 on the file of the their respondent police respectively, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶5

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused had illegally transported 573 cans of illicit arrack each containing 35 liters. Hence, the case.

¶6

Mr. Mohamed Riyaz, the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶7

would submit that since the petitioner was already granted bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.2657 of 2022 vide Order dated 04.02.2022, the respondent have registered other cases as against the petitioner.

¶8

Page 1 of 6

¶9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶10

Crl.O.P.No.21985 of 2022

¶11

Therefore, he was unable to surrender and execute the sureties. He would submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish sufficient sureties and to abide any stringent condition as imposed by this Court. He would further submit that without prejudice, the petitioner is prepared to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the Government for any welfare purpose. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶12

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent would submit the petitioner is the main kingpin involved in the transport of the rectified spirit from the State of Maharastra. He would further submit that though the petitioner hails from Kerala, he has given Maharastra address and the petitioner is also not available at the address shown in the petition. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶13

In reply, Mr.Mohammed Riyaz, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish the proof of his permanent residence. He would further submit that the

¶14

Page 2 of 6

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

Crl.O.P.No.21985 of 2022

¶17

petitioner is ready and willing to abide any stringent condition that may be imposed on him and also reiterated that in all these cases the petitioner has been implicated only based on the confession statement recorded from the co-accused.

¶18

Heard the learned counsel. Perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without prejudice, petitioner is undertaking to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the Government for any welfare purpose, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶19

Accordingly, the petitioner shall produce the proof of his permanent residence to the respondent police and shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) as non refundable deposit to “ Chief Minister's Public Relief Fund, Indian Overseas Bank, Secretariat Branch, Chennai SB.A/c. No.117201000000070, IFSC Code. No.IOBA0001172” without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court, on such deposit and production of

¶20

Page 3 of 6

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

Crl.O.P.No.21985 of 2022

¶23

proof, 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 on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gingee on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two sureties each 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:

¶24

[a] the petitioner and 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.

¶25

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 15 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

Page 4 of 6

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

Crl.O.P.No.21985 of 2022

¶31

trial.

¶32

[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].

¶33

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

11.10.2022

mpl/gd

Page 5 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

Crl.O.P.No.21985 of 2022

¶39

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J. mpl/gd

¶40

Crl.O.P.No.21985 of 2022

¶41

11.10.2022

¶42

Page 6 of 6

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Ketan Laxmidas Majithia v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ketan Laxmidas Majithia v. the 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vengadachalam Vs Inspector of Police

Spn Krishnamoorthy Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Police

Chelladhuraj Vs the State Rep by Its

Anoop Madhavan Cheriyandi Vs the State Rep by

Anoop Madhavan Cheriyandi Vs State Rep by

Anoop Madhavan Cheriyandi Vs Iop, Villupuram District