Santhosh @ Dodry v. State Rep By, Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Santhosh @ Dodry
...Petitioner/Accused 2
Vs.
State rep by The Inspector of Police, Madhuravoyal Police Station, Chennai District.
(Crime No.36 of 2025) ...
Respondent PRAYER: This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.36 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :
Mr.R.Rajadurai For Respondent :
Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Page No.1 of 6
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 08.01.2025, seeking bail in Crime No.36 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 278, 123 of BNS r/w Section 77 of JJ Act, 2015.
2.It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner along with the other accused was found in illegal possession of 1450 Tydol tablets; and that from the petitioner, 253 tablets were recovered. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations are false and the petitioner is sought to be implicated on the confession of co-accused; that the contraband has been seized and that the petitioner is in custody from 08.01.2025 and hence further custody of the petitioner is not required and sought for bail. Page No.2 of 6
4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the contraband has been seized and the petitioner has one previous case and he is on bail in that case and that final report has been filed.
5.Considering the fact that the petitioner is sought to be implicated on the confession of co-accused, the contraband was seized and the petitioner is on bail in the previous case and final report has been filed, this Court is of the view that further custody of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his 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 Judicial Magistrate No.II, Poonamallee, 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.3 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.
12.03.2025 ata Page No.4 of 6
Copy to:
1.The Inspector of Police, Madhuravoyal Police Station, Chennai District.
2.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Poonamallee. 3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
Page No.5 of 6
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
ata 12.03.2025 Page No.6 of 6