Dismissed

Thirumalai @ Balan v. State Rep by

Madras HC7 Jun 2023CRL OP/8815/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order dismissed a bail application challenging the possession of PDS rice. The court rejected the plea citing the petitioner's role as a habitual offender in similar past cases, the large quantum of alleged contraband, and the absence of any change in circumstances necessitating bail.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Original Petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed.

Thirumalai @ Balan Vs State Rep by — Corruption | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.8815 of 2023

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.8815 of 2023

¶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 6(4) of TN Scheduled Commodities (RDCS) Oder 1982, and Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 in Crime No. 41 of 2022, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶5

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused were found in possession of 18,000 Kgs of PDS rice in 360 bags illegally worth about Rs.5,14,000/- . Hence the complaint.

¶6

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the offence as alleged by the prosecution.

¶7

Page 1 of 4

¶8

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

¶9

Crl.O.P.No.8815 of 2023

¶10

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that totally there are five accused in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A1. The petitioner is a habitual offender and he involved in three previous cases similar in nature which are registered in Crime Nos.91 of 2021, 243 of 2021 and 97 of 2022. This is the third application filed by the petitioner seeking anticipatory bail before this Court. This Court earlier, taking into consideration of the huge quantity of PDS rice and also found that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required in this case, dismissed the petition in Crl.O.P.No.12271 of 2022 filed by the petitioner, vide order dated 20.05.2022. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner

¶11

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the FIR.

¶12

Taking into account the petitioner was in possession of huge quantity of PDS rice and the petitioner is a habitual offender and he has

¶13

Page 2 of 4

¶14

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

¶15

Crl.O.P.No.8815 of 2023

¶16

involved in three cases which are similar in nature, further absolutely, there is no change of circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

07.06.2023

mfa

Page 3 of 4

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

¶21

Crl.O.P.No.8815 of 2023

¶22

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶23

mfa

¶24

Crl.O.P.No.8815 of 2023

¶25

07.06.2023

¶26

Page 4 of 4

¶27

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

Thirumalai @ Balan v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thirumalai @ Balan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Juzar Saifuddin @ Joozar Saibutheen and 3 Others Vs Inspector of Police

H.Lurdu Mari Vs the Inspector of Police

Ashok Kumar Vs State Rep by Its

Santhi Vs Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station

P.Murugesan Vs State Rep by

State Rep by Vs G.Janakiraman