Korra Beemeshwar Rao v. State Represented By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.08.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Korra Beemeshwar Rao, S/o.Korra Narsingarao ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep. By its The Inspector of Police, PEW, Guduvanchery, C.C.No.566 of 2024, Crime No.35/2024.

... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in C.C.No.566 of 2024 on the file of the II Additional Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under NDPS Act, Chennai.

For Petitioner :

Mr.Ravindran Venkatachalapathy For Respondent :

Mr.L.Baskaran Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner/accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.02.2024, for an alleged offence punishable under Section 8(c) read with 1/4

Section 20(b) (ii) (C), 29(1) of NDPS Act in C.C. No.566 of 2024, registered on the file of the II Additional Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under NDPS Act, Chennai, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in possession of 30 Kgs of Ganja, which is in commercial quantity. Hence, the case was registered.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is the 5th bail petition filed by the petitioner. However, there is change in circumstances, earlier bail petitions were dismissed on the ground that final report already filed, however, the copy was served only after 26.05.2025. In the final report, it appears that only 20 Kgs of Ganja seized from the petitioner and there is no independent witness for the said seizure. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that based on the secret information with regard to the illegal selling of Ganja from Andhra, the respondent police has arrested the petitioner. Hence, he strongly opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

2/4

5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the records.

6. This Court has already considered the facts and circumstances and found that it is not the fit case for bail. In the final report, it appears that there is no independent witness for the seizure, therefore citing this circumstance, learned counsel for petitioner seeks bail. However, this Court is of the view that whether there is an independent witness or not to be decided only by the Trial Court and it will not give presumption that the petitioner is an innocent person. Hence, this Criminal Original petition stands dismissed.

18.08.2025 mp To

1. II Additional Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Cases under NDPS Act, Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police, PEW, Guduvanchery, Chennai.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN , J.

mp 18.08.2025 4/4