Partly allowed

Syed Ibrahim v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC27 Oct 2017CRL MP(MD)/9618/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order relaxes the locus standi for two petitioners charged under the NDPS Act. The court modified the condition of appearing before the Magistrate twice a week until further orders, noting the petitioner's compliance over 42 days.

What did the court decide?

The condition imposed on the petitioner was modified to require appearance before the Magistrate twice a week on every Monday and Friday at 10.30 a.m.

Syed Ibrahim Vs the Inspector of Police — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶2

Friday, the Twenty Seventh day of October Two Thousand Seventeen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI CRL MP(MD) Nos.9618 & 9619 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.11384 & 11244 of 2017 SYED IBRAHIM ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN CRL MP(MD) No.9618 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.11384 of 2017

¶5

KARTHICK ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN CRL MP(MD) No.9619 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.11244 of 2017

¶6

¶7

THE STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SELLUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT (CRIME NO.1589 OF 2017) ... RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN BOTH THE PETITIONS

¶8

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the petition filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to relax the condition imposed in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.11384 of 2017 dated 08.09.2017

¶9

Prayer in CRL MP(MD). 9619/ 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) No.11244 of 2017: To relax the condition imposed in Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 11244 of 2017 dated 08.09.2017

¶10

Order : These petitions coming on for orders upon perusing the petitions filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.M.RAMU, Advocate for the petitioner in both the petitions and of MR.K.ANBARASAN, Government Advocate (Crl.side) on behalf of the Respondent the court made the following order:-

¶11

The Petitioner filed this relaxation petition after complying the condition imposed by this Court before the respondent Police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w. 20(b) (C), 25, 27 (A) and 29(1) of NDPS Act, in crime No.1589 of 2017.

¶12

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

3.The Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the

¶14

respondent Police submitted that the petitioner is regularly complying with the conditions imposed by this Court for a period of 42 days.

¶15

4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the condition already imposed on the petitioner is modified to the effect that the petitioner shall appear before the concerned Magistrate, twice in a week i.e., on every Monday and Friday at 10.30 a.m until further orders.

¶16

sd/-

¶17

27/10/2017

¶18

/ TRUE COPY /

¶19

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.)

¶20

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶21

Madurai - 625 023.

¶22

¶23

1 THE PRINCIPAL SPECIAL JUDGE FOR EC & NDPS ACT CASES, MADURAI.

¶24

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

¶25

SELLUR POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT

¶26

3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT,

¶27

MADURAI

¶28

ORDER

¶29

¶30

CRL MP(MD) Nos.9618 & 9619 of 2017 IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.11384 & 11244 of 2017

¶31

Date :27/10/2017

¶32

SMA/PM-PN/SAR-4/01.11.2017:2P/4c

¶33

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

Syed Ibrahim v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Ibrahim v. the Inspector of Police

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

M. Sanmugavel Vs the Inspector of Police

Shahul Hameed Vs the Inspector of Police

T.Ambica Vs the Deputy Superintendent of

K.Vijayakumar Vs Muniyasamy

Thirumalai Ganesan Vs the Inspector of Police

S.Alexander Vs the Inspector of Police