Allowed

Ganesan v. State Rep.by

Madras HC3 Jul 2024CRL OP/15467/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to the petitioner in a Narcotics Act case involving 1.300 kg of Ganja. The court considered the intermediate quantity and prior incarceration, directing release on a Rs. 10,000 bond with conditions including a mandatory deposit to the Advocate Clerk's Welfare Association.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, including a mandatory condition to deposit Rs. 10,000 with the Tamil Nadu Advocate Clerk's Welfare Association within two weeks.

Ganesan Vs State Rep.by — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 03.07.2024

¶3

CORAM

¶4

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

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.15467 of 2024

Ganesan

... Petitioner

Vs.

State Rep by. The Inspector of Police, D2 Annasalai Police Station ( L & O ) Chennai - 600 002. Crime No. 54 of 2024.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with the crime No. 54 of 2024 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr. V.Santhosh For Respondent : Mr.Meganathan Government Advocate (Crl. side)

¶13

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

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.04.2024 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 8 (c ) r/w 20(b) (ii) (B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances

¶16

Act, 1985 in crime No. 54 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶17

The case of the prosecution is that the accused were found to be in illegal possession of 1.300 kgs of Ganja. Hence the case.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner 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.

¶19

On the other side, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) submits that two previous case pending against the petitioner. However, he raised objection to grant bail.

¶20

Considering the period of incarceration undergone by the

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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 II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, and on further conditions that:

¶24

[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;

¶25

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on alternative days at 10.30 a.m., until further order. Further, the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the credit of registered Tamil Nadu Advocate Clerk's Welfare Association, Chennai, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶26

3/5

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

[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];

¶31

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

¶32

03.07.2024

¶33

pbl

¶34

T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.

¶35

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

¶36

pbl

¶37

¶38

The II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

¶39

2.The Inspector of Police, D2 Annasalai Police Station, Chennai - 600 002.

¶40

The Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

¶41

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶42

Crl.O.P.No.15467 of 2024

¶43

03.07.2024

¶44

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

Ganesan v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesan v. 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

Jayanthi Vs the State Rep by

S Radhakrishnan Vs the Inspector of Police

Ravi Vs State Represented by

Jadayan @ Sadaiyan Vs the State Rep by

E.Kumaresan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Ajay Vs State Rep by