Dinesh v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.03.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Crl.O.P.No.7782 of 2025 Dinesh .. Petitioner Vs.
The State rep by The Inspector of Police, E-1 Mylapore Police Station, Chennai.
(Crime No.167 of 2025) .. Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.167 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police.
For Petitioner : M/s.S.Senthilvel For Respondent : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate(Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29(1) Page No.1 of 7
of NDPS Act in Crime No.167 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.
The case of the prosecution is that the co-accused was found in possession of 1.1 kg of Ganja and on confession, it was revealed that the petitioner is the supplier.
3.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the allegations are false and the petitioner is sought to be implicated only on the confession of co-accused, and that in any case, custodial interrogation is not required and sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.
The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the petitioner is sought to be implicated on the confession of co-accused; that the petitioner has no bad antecedents.
5.
Considering the nature of allegations, the fact that the petitioner is sought to be implicated on the confession of co-accused, the contraband Page No.2 of 7
was seized from the co-accused, the petitioner has no bad antecedents and since, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
6.
Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties 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, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the petitioner and 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. [b] the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.
Page No.3 of 7
[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond 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 Petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the Petitioners 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 BNS.
18.03.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No dpa Page No.4 of 7
To 1.The Inspector of Police, E-1 Mylapore Police Station, Chennai.
2. The learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet.
3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.
Page No.5 of 7
SUNDER MOHAN , J.
dpa Crl.O.P.No.7782 of 2025 Page No.6 of 7
18.03.2025 Page No.7 of 7