Allowed

Raja v. State Rep by

Madras HC19 Oct 2024CRL OP/25665/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the petitioner, Raja, accused of illegal possession of ganja under the NDPS Act. Finding the quantity not commercial and noting no contraband was recovered from him, the court ordered release on execution of a security bond with two sureties and specific reporting and restraint conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties each, subject to conditions of reporting, non-interference, and non-absolute.

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

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.25665 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 19.10.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.25665 of 2024

¶7

Raja ...Petitioner/Accused

¶8

Vs.

¶9

State Represented by The Inspector of Police, G-2, Periamet Police Station, Chennai.

¶10

(Crime No.200 of 2024)

¶11

...Respondent/Complainant

¶12

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. Act, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.200 of 2024 on the file of respondent police.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.U.Yuvaraj

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶15

¶16

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

¶17

Crl.O.P.No.25665 of 2024

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody

¶20

on 06.09.2024 for the offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act, in Crime No.200 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶21

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with other accused, were found in illegal possession of 1.250 kgs of Ganja for selling. Hence the complaint.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person, he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submitted that the petitioner was included as an accused only based on the confession statement of the co-accused; that the co-accused was arrested and released on bail; and that no contraband was recovered from the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 06.09.2024; that he is a law-abiding citizen; that he is ready to furnish substantial sureties for his due release on bail; and therefore, he

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.O.P.No.25665 of 2024

¶25

prays for the grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶26

Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police submitted that there are five accused in this case; that the petitioner is arrayed as A5; and that the petitioner, along with other accused, were found in illegal possession of 1.250 kgs of Ganja for selling. He further submitted that there are two previous cases pending against the petitioner, which are similar in nature. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶27

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶28

Considering the representation made by both sides, the nature of offences, the quantity of material involved in this case is not a commercial quantity, that no contraband was recovered from the petitioner, that the petitioner was included as an accused only based on the confession statement of the co-accused and the co-accused was arrested and released on bail, that though the petitioner has two previous cases, in those cases already he was granted bail and also considering the

¶29

3/7

¶30

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

¶31

Crl.O.P.No.25665 of 2024

¶32

incarceration period undergone by the petitioner from 06.09.2024, this

¶33

Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions:

¶34

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on

¶35

his executing a 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

¶36

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

¶37

[a] the petitioner shall report before the Principal Special Court under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai – 104 on all working days at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

¶38

[b] the petitioner shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond;

¶39

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;

¶40

[d] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the

¶41

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

¶42

Crl.O.P.No.25665 of 2024

¶43

Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶44

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

¶45

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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]; and

¶46

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of the B.N.S.

19.10.2024

1.The II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

¶51

2.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison - II, Puzhal, Chennai.

¶52

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

¶53

5/7

¶54

Crl.O.P.No.25665 of 2024

¶55

3.The Inspector of Police, G-2, Periamet Police Station, Chennai.

¶56

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶57

P.DHANABAL, J . dk

¶58

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

¶59

Crl.O.P.No.25665 of 2024

¶60

Crl.O.P.No.25665 of 2024

¶61

19.10.2024

¶62

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

Raja v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja 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

S.Mangalraj Vs State through

Jayashree Hari, F/48 Yrs, Vs State Represented by Its

Ajay (A-4) Vs State Represented by

A.Anandhan Vs the State Rep.by

Ellappan Vs State rep by

Abdul Kadir Vs State Rep.by