Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case involving seizure of over 1000 kg of banned tobacco products across four vehicles, including 560 kg from the petitioner's vehicle. The court refused bail given the huge quantity involved and dismissed the petition.
None; anticipatory bail refused.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.O.P.No.3099 of 2024
Crl.O.P.No.3099 of 2024
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
The petitioner/A2 who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 273 and 328 of IPC and Sections 7 and 9(2) of COTPA Act in Crime No.9 of 2024, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.It is stated that four vehicles were involved in transporting more than 1000 Kgs of banned Tobacco products and from the vehicle of the petitioner herein 560 kgs of banned Tobacco products had been seized.
3.Taking into consideration the huge quantities of banned tobacco products which had been transported, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.
14.02.2024
smv
1/2
Crl.O.P.No.3099 of 2024
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
smv
Crl.O.P.No.3099 of 2024
14.02.2024
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to a petitioner apprehending arrest for transporting large quantities of banned tobacco products.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
A2
C.V.Karthikeyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
