Allowed

Maanikam v. Inspector of Police

Madras HC11 Jul 2023CRL OP/14171/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras granted bail to a petitioner arrested under the NDPS Act for alleged possession of ganja. The court found no incriminating material or recovery against the petitioner, who was implicated based on a co-accused confession, and noted that other accused had been released on bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to daily reporting, non-absconding, and non-tampering conditions.

Maanikam Vs Inspector of Police — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.OP.No.14171 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED :11.07.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN

¶6

Crl.OP.No.14171 of 2023

¶7

Maanikam ..Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

State Rep by its, The Inspector of Police, Rathinapuri Police Station, Coimbatore District. Crime No.416 of 2022. ...Respondent

¶10

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Crime No.416 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police pending investigation.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Arun Kumar

¶12

For Respondent : Mr. Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial

¶15

custody on 20.02.2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 272, 273, 328 IPC and Sections 8 (c), 20 (b) (ii) (C) & 25 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in Crime No.416 of 2022, on the file

¶16

of the respondent police seeks bail.

¶17

1/6

¶18

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

¶19

Crl.OP.No.14171 of 2023

¶20

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, petitioner is A11 in this case. He is implicated as a prospective buyer of

¶21

Ganja from the accused from whom Ganja had been recovered. Petitioner is in judicial custody from 20.02.2023. He further submitted that the other accused had been released on bail in Crl.O.P.No.176 of 2023, dated 23.01.2023, Crl.O.P.No.628 of 2023, dated 25.01.2023, Crl.O.P.No.2940 of 2023, dated 14.02.2023, Crl.O.P.No.2968 of 2023, dated 15.02.2023, Crl.O.P.No.8786 of 2023, dated 27.04.2023. Thus, he seeks bail for the petitioner.

¶22

In response, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶23

submitted that petitioner has been implicated in this case for the reason that he is the prospective buyer of Ganja from the persons from whom Ganja was recovered. There is no recovery from the petitioner. Petitioner is implicated in this case on the basis of the confession statement of the co-accused.

¶24

Considering the allegations against the petitioner that the

¶25

petitioner is a prospective buyer of Ganja and he was implicated only on

¶26

2/6

¶27

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

¶28

Crl.OP.No.14171 of 2023

¶29

the basis of the confession statement of the co-accused and also the fact that there was no recovery of contraband from him rather no incriminating material is available against him and having regard to the fact that other accused were granted bail, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The reason is that there is ground for believing that he is not guilty of such offence and this fact leads to the presumption that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

¶30

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail

¶31

on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) with two sureties , each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court -II, Coimbatore and on further conditions that :-

¶32

[a] 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.

¶33

3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

Crl.OP.No.14171 of 2023

¶35

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30.a.m., until further orders.

¶36

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶37

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

¶38

[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].

¶39

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

¶40

11.07.2023

¶41

sli

¶42

4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

Crl.OP.No.14171 of 2023

¶44

¶45

Judicial Magistrate Court -II, Coimbatore.

¶46

2.The Inspector of Police, Rathinapuri Police Station, Coimbatore District.

¶47

Crime No.416 of 2022.

¶48

Central Prison, Coimbatore.

¶49

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras

¶50

5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶51

Crl.OP.No.14171 of 2023

¶52

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN. J.

¶53

sli

¶54

Crl.O.P.No.14171 of 2023

¶55

11.07.2023

¶56

6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Maanikam v. Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maanikam v. Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Mahendran Vs the Inspector of Police

Jadaba Beshra Vs State Rep by

Rajaram Vs the Inspector of Police

Srihari Vs State Rep by

Gadiraju Sandeep Vs the State Rep by

Manikandan Vs State Rep by