Ramana @ Betta Ramana Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.08.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1), 25 of NDPS Act, 1985 in Crime

¶21

No. 218 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that on 27.06.2024, A1 to A3 were in illegal joint possession of 22 kg contraband. Based on the

¶23

confession of A1, the petiitoner has been arrayed as A5. Hence the case.

¶24

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that based on the confession of A1 only, the petitioner has been arrayed as A5 and A1 and A3 were released on statutory bail. He would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.08.2024. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

¶25

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the

¶26

2/6

¶27

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

¶28

CRL OP(MD). No. 9288 of 2025

¶29

respondent would submit that investigation was completed and charge sheet was filed and the same is taken on file. He would further submit that the petitioner has no previous case. He would further submit that the offences are grave in nature and hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶30

This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶31

Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and considering the facts that based on the confession of A1 only, the petitioner has been arrayed as A5 and investigation was completed and charge sheet was filed and the case is pending before the Trial Court and the petitioner has no previous case and also A1 and A3 were released on statutory bail and also no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶32

3/6

¶33

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

¶34

CRL OP(MD). No. 9288 of 2025

¶35

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released

¶36

on bail on condition to execute 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 learned Principal Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

¶37

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Principal Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act cases, Madurai, on all working days at 10.30 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., until further orders;

¶38

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to

¶39

the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

¶40

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

¶41

[e] 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with

¶42

4/6

¶43

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

¶44

CRL OP(MD). No. 9288 of 2025

¶45

the evidence;

¶46

[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].

¶47

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 01.04.2026

apd

To