BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty First day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.15077 of 2011 N.LAZER ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.6 Vs STATE REP BY ITS THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLEMCODE POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT (CRIME NO.384 OF 2011) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. C.MAYILVAHANA RAJENDRAN Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.S.DURAI PANDIAN Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner was arrested on 01.11.2011 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 4 and 5 of Explosive Act 1908 ad Section 5(a) and 6 of Explosive Substance Act and under Section 120(b) and 34 of IPC, in Crime No.384 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seek bail. 2.Herad Mr.C.Mayilvahana Rajendran, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.S.Duraipandian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioner has been arrayed as A-6 and he did not commit any crime as stated in the complaint and he is an innocent person. He would further submit that in his argument that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 01.11.2011 and he has been faslely implicated in this case. He would also submit that the investigation ought to have been over by this time and he is also having permanent residence and therefore, he would request for the grant of bail. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit in his argument that the petitioner was also booked under the Goondas Act on 19.11.2011 and the alleged crime said to have been committed by the petitioner is serious in nature and therefore, the bail plea of the petitioner could not be considered. 5.Considering the submissions made on either side, this Court could see that the petitioner has been detained under the Goondas Act on the sole ground that he is involved in this case. Considering the seriousness of the offence and he has already under the Goondas detention, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 6.Therefore, the Petition seeking bail stands dismissed. sd/- 21/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI 2.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLEMCODE POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT 3.THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, PALAYAMKOTTAI +1. CC to M/S. C.MAYILVAHANA RAJENDRAN Advocate SR.No.40599 rl/5c – 22.11.2011 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.15077 of 2011 Date :21/11/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/