M.Ajith Kumar v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By

T.V.TAMILSELVI, J., The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.05.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(c) and 29(1) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in C.C.No.786 of 2023, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on receiving a secret information, the respondent Police conducted a search, wherein they found that the petitioner and other accused were found to be in illegal possession of contraband substance of 80 kgs of Ganja. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that only on the confession statement of the first accused, the petitioner has been implicated as an accused in this case. He also submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any

condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The respondent has filed a detailed Counter.

5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submits that there are totally 3 accused in this case and that the petitioner is ranked as A2. He further submits that the petitioner along with other accused were found to be in illegal possession of 80 kgs of Ganja, which is commercial quantity was seized from the petitioner and also he is having two previous cases under Section 302 of IPC against him. He also stated that investigation in this case is almost completed and that if the petitioner is released on bail, he would tamper the witnesses. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the

case and the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and also the fact that the petitioner is having two previous cases registered against him and on considering the gravity of the offence, and also the total commercial quantity of contraband involved in this case is huge, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary, therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

20.06.2024 ssi

T.V.TAMILSELVI, J., ssi 20.06.2024