Allowed

Vijay v. State Rep by, the Inspector of Police

Madras HC26 Apr 2023CRL OP/9192/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. concerning offences under the NDPS Act, the High Court granted bail to the petitioners. The court directed them to make a non-refundable deposit of Rs.15,000 to a specific charity and execute a bond with sureties. The petitioners were also ordered to report daily to the police station.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with a mandatory deposit of Rs.15,000 to a charity, a separate bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, and strict conditions including daily police reporting.

Vijay Vs State Rep by, the Inspector of Police — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.9192 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 26.04.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.9192 of 2023

¶7

1.Vijay 2.Vinoth Kumar

¶8

... Petitioners

¶9

Vs.

¶10

State represented by The Inspector of Police, Guduvancherry-PEW Police Station, Crime No.86 of 2023

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.,

¶13

pleased to enlarge the petitioners on bail in pending investigation in Crime

¶14

No.86 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police.

¶15

For Petitioners : M/s.V.Elangovan

¶16

For Respondent : Mr.C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/7

¶20

Crl.O.P.No.9192 of 2023

¶21

custody on 26.03.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) 20(b)(II)(B) and 29(1) of NDPS Act in Crime No.86 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners were found to be in illegal possession of 2.300 kgs of Ganja. Hence, this case.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that even as per the prosecution, the contraband alleged to have been recovered from the petitioners is an intermediate quantity. He would further submit that though several cases were registered against the first petitioner, the fact remains that the respondent police in order to keep him in continuous detention, the respondent Police has foisted the said cases. He also submitted that the wife of the first petitioner is pregnant and the delivery date fixed by the Doctor is on 03.05.2023 and the petitioners are in judicial custody from 26.03.2023. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioners.

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/7

¶25

2/7

¶26

Crl.O.P.No.9192 of 2023

¶27

The Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioners were found to be in illegal possession of 2.300 kgs of Ganja., which is an intermediate quantity. He further submitted that the first petitioner has got six previous cases and the second petitioner has no previous case. Hence he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioners.

¶28

5.In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the

¶29

petitioners, without prejudice to their defense and contention, are ready and willing to deposit an amount of Rs.15,000/- to any welfare scheme run by the Government and they are also ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioners.

¶30

6.Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and perused the materials available on record.

¶31

8.On considering the voluntary submission made by the learned

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/7

¶33

Crl.O.P.No.9192 of 2023

¶34

counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen Thousand only) jointly to the credit of " Rehoboth - Home for Mentally Challenged Homeless Women, No.22, Viswas Nagar, Koluthuvancherri, Paraniaputhur, Chennai ",", without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the trial Court.

¶35

Merely, because the petitioners have deposited the said amount, it would not amount to admission of their guilt. Therefore, it is open to the trial Court to deal with the case independently.

¶36

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and taking note of the fact that the petitioners have come forward to deposit an amount of Rs.15,000/- jointly to the credit of the " Rehoboth - Home for Mentally Challenged Homeless Women, No.22, Viswas Nagar, Koluthuvancherri, Paraniaputhur, Chennai " and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

¶37

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/7

¶39

4/7

¶40

Crl.O.P.No.9192 of 2023

¶41

on condition to make a non refundable deposit of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees

¶42

fifteen Thousand only) jointly to the credit of " Rehoboth - Home for Mentally Challenged Homeless Women, No.22, Viswas Nagar, Koluthuvancherri, Paraniaputhur, Chennai " , without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the trial Court, on such deposit and production of proof, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

¶43

Magistrate No.2, Chengalpattu, and on further conditions that:

¶44

[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;

¶45

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 p.m., until further orders;

¶46

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶47

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶48

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take

¶49

5/7

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/7

¶51

Crl.O.P.No.9192 of 2023

¶52

appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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];

¶53

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

26.04.2023

smn

The Judicial Magistrate No.2, Chengalpattu

¶58

The Inspector of Police, Guduvancherry-PEW Police Station, Crime No.86 of 2023

¶59

The Central Prison, Puzhal.

¶60

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶61

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/7

¶62

6/7

¶63

Crl.O.P.No.9192 of 2023

¶64

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.,J.

¶65

smn

¶66

Crl.O.P.No.9192 of 2023

¶67

26.04.2023

¶68

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/7

Vijay v. State Rep by, the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay v. State Rep by, 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Thiruselvi Vs the State Rep by Its

S.Baranidharan Vs the State Rep by Its

Vijay @ Monkey Vijay Vs Inspector of Police

M.Chokalingam, Vs Leo Felix Louis

Prakash Vs the State Rep by Its

P. Muthupandi Vs the State Rep.by