Arun Nayak v. The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.02.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Arun Nayak

...Petitioner/Accused 27

Vs.

State rep by The Inspector of Police, Vellode Police Station, Erode District.

(Crime No.87 of 2024) ...

Respondent PRAYER: This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No.87 of 2024 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners :

Mr.R.T.Vishnu For Respondent :

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.12.2024, seeking bail Page No.1 of 6

in Crime No.87 of 2024 registered for the offence under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 of NDPS Act.

2.It is the case of the prosecution that on 29.05.2024, the respondent police conducted routine checkup and found A1 to A3 in possession of 150.850 kgs of ganja and their confession revealed that the petitioner had funded A1 to A3 for the purchase of said ganja from Andhra Pradesh. Hence, the case.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations are false; that the petitioner has no previous cases and that since he is sought to be implicated only on the confession of co-accused, the petitioner has satisfied the requirement of twin conditions of NDPS Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that this Court had granted bail to the co-accused in this case in Crl.O.P.Nos.20833, 23084, 22861, 24001, 23406, 24595, 26196, 27532 & 25522 of 2024 and that no previous case is pending against the petitioner and considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, he may be released on bail. Page No.2 of 6

4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the respondent has collected the bank statements of the accused which confirms that there was money transaction between the petitioner and A1 to A3 and that the other evidence available is the confession statement of co-accused. He further confirms the fact that similarly placed co-accused were granted bail by this Court and that no previous case is pending against the petitioner. 5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6.This Court had considered the bail application of the co-accused wherein this Court has observed as follows:

"6.Considering the representation made by both side; the nature of allegation charged against the petitioners, that no recovery was made from the petitioners and the contraband was recovered from A1 and A2 only, that based on the confession of the coaccused, these petitioners were arrayed as an accused in this case, that the petitioners have no previous cases in Page No.3 of 6

similar kind of offences and also taking into consideration the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions:"

7.Apart from the confession statement of co-accused, the only other material available is bank transactions. Therefore, this Court is the view that the recovery made from A1 and A2 cannot be attributed to the petitioner and thus, the petitioner has satisfied the twin conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Hence, considering the aforesaid facts, period of incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions: 8.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Judge/Presiding Officer for Essential Commodities Act Cases, Coimbatore, and on further conditions that: [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; Page No.4 of 6

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[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];

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

28.02.2025 ata Page No.5 of 6

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

ata Copy to:

1.The Inspector of Police, Vellode Police Station, Erode.

2.The learned Additional Judge/Presiding Officer for Essential Commodities Act Cases, Coimbatore.

3.Central Prison, Coimbatore.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

28.02.2025 Page No.6 of 6