Vasuki v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Seventeenth day of February Two Thousand Twenty Two PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice R. PONGIAPPAN CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.3222 of 2022 VASUKI [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ] Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, D5 MARINA POLICE, CHENNAI CRIME NO.1348 OF 2016 For Petitioner : P.THINESH Advocate For Respondent : MR.S.SANTHOSH, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in Crime No.1348 of 2016, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on secret information, the respondent police went to the place of occurrence and they found that the petitioner and other accused were in selling of ganja illegally. On seeing the respondent police, the petitioner flew away from the scene of occurrence. Hence, the complaint was registered by the respondent police.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent lady and she has not committed any such offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the based on the co-accused confession statement, the petitioner has been arrayed as accused. Hence, he pleads for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police by filing counter, raised objection stating that as of now, the investigation is pending. He also submits that the properties which are involved during the alleged occurrence have been recovered and they are in custody of the respondent police and the petitioner has five previous cases similar in nature.

5. Submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing on either sides are considered.

6. The respondent police registered a case against the petitioner for the offence punishable under 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Admittedly, the properties which are required for completing the investigation have already been recovered by the respondent police and the petitioner has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in the previous cases. Further based on the confession statement given by the co-accused, the petitioner has been implicated as accused in this case.

7. Taking note of all the above said aspects into consideration and having regard to the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner, this Court came to the conclusion that for the completion of investigation, custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be necessary in this case. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions. 8.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

(a) the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the credit of the Madras High Court Advocate Clerks Welfare Association, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and shall produce the said receipt before the Court below.

(b) the petitioner and the sureties shall affix his photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(c) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Wednesday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

(d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(f) 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]; and; (g) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

-sd/- 17/02/2022 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, NO.II, EGMORE.

2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI [FOR INFORMATION].

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, D5 MARINA POLICE, CHENNAI 4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

5 THE MADRAS HIGH COURT ADVOCATE CLERKS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, CHENNAI.

CC to P.THINESH Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.3222/2022 Date :17/02/2022 JPA 22/02/2022