Anilkumar Pragajapath v. State Rep. By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN 1.Anilkumar Pragajapath 2.Ramnivas 3.Dharmaraj ... Petitioners /Accused 1 to 3 Vs.

The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Shevapet Police Station, Salem.

... Respondent/ Complainant (Crime No.206 of 2025) Prayer: This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No.206 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For petitioners : Mr.S.Senthilvel For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Page No.1 of 6

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.03.2025, seeking bail in Crime No.206 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 6 and 24(1) of COTPA, 2003 r/w Section 77 of JJ Act. 2.It is the case of the prosecution that based on a secret information, the respondent and their officials went to the scene of occurrence and found the petitioners along with the other accused in possession of banned tobacco products worth about Rs.1,52,586/- in a shop. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent; that they have no bad antecedents and the contraband has been seized and the petitioners are in custody from 03.03.2025 and hence, their further custody is not required. 4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the contraband has been seized and that the petitioners have no bad antecedents. Page No.2 of 6

5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6.Considering the nature of allegations, period of incarceration, the fact that the contraband has been seized, the petitioners have no bad antecedents and since their further custody is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions:

7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing separate bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate No.3, Salem, 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioners 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 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 B.N.S.

21.03.2025 ata Page No.4 of 6

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Shevapet Police Station, Salem.

2.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Salem.

3.The Judicial Magistrate No.3, Salem.

4.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

Page No.5 of 6

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

ata 21.03.2025 Page No.6 of 6