Allowed

Pandiyan v. the State Rep by

Madras HC24 Jun 2024CRL OP/13539/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner arrested for illegal possession of Ganja under NDPS Act, considering the intermediate quantity seized and almost completed investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by executing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, one being a blood surety, each for Rs.10,000, subject to conditions like daily reporting and deposit of Rs.20,000.

Pandiyan Vs the State Rep by — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 24.06.2024

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.13539 of 2024

Pandiyan

... Petitioner

Vs.

State Rep by. The Inspector of Police, Tiruppur south Police Station, Tiruppur. Crime No. 294 of 2024.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in crime No. 294 of 2024 on the file of The Inspector of Police, Tiruppur south Police

¶12

Station, Tiruppur.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr. P. Thinesh For Respondent : Mr.Meganathan Government Advocate (Crl. side)

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/5

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 07.05.2024 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections

¶17

8 (c ) r/w 20(b) (ii) (B), of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

¶18

Act, 1985 in crime No. 294 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶19

The case of the prosecution is that the accused were found to be in illegal possession of 2.100 kgs of Ganja. Hence the case.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

¶21

has been falsely implicated in this case and he is an innocent person. Further, he submitted that contraband seized from the accused persons is intermediate quantity. Learned counsel prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶22

On the other side, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) submits that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. However, he raised objection to grant bail.

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/5

¶24

Considering the period of incarceration undergone by the

¶25

petitioner and and also investigation is almost completed. Further, the contraband seized from the petitioner is intermediate quantity. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶26

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties ( one must be a blood surety), each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District Judge, Presiding Officer, Special Court for Essential commodities Act cases, Coimbatore, and on further conditions that:

¶27

[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;

¶28

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further order. Further, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the credit of registered Tamil Nadu Advocate Clerk's Welfare Association, Tiruppur,

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/5

¶30

within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

[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];

¶34

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

¶35

24.06.2024

¶36

pbl

¶37

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/5

¶39

pbl

¶40

¶41

The Additional District Judge, Presiding Officer, Special Court for Essential commodities Act cases, Coimbatore

¶42

2.The Inspector of Police, Tiruppur south Police Station, Tiruppur.

¶43

The Central Prison, Tiruppur.

¶44

The Public Prosecutor,

¶45

High Court of Madras.

¶46

Crl.O.P.No.13539 of 2024

¶47

24.06.2024

¶48

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

¶49

5/5

Pandiyan v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pandiyan v. the State Rep by

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

M.S.Subramanian Vs Sundaram Brake Linings Ltd.

G. Rajendran Vs P.C. Ramalingam (Died) 1. Somasundaram

Seema Devi Vs Dr. Devasenapathy

H.Y. Anand Reddy Vs Srinivasa Reddy

Manoj Vs State Rep by

J Sha Ahmmed Kabeer Vs the State Rep by Its