Ragunathan v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.06.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Ragunathan ... Petitioner Vs.

The State: Represented by The Inspector of Police M-4, Redhills Police Station Chennai Crime No.332 of 2023 ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.332 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Raghavan For Respondent : Mr. C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/6

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.05.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B), 25 and 29(1) of the NDPS Act in Crime No.332 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 02.05.2023, the petitioner along with another accused was found in possession of 1.200 Kgs. of Ganja. Subsequently, both the accused were arrested and the contraband as well as the auto bearing Regn. No.TN 18 AV 7299, were seized by the respondent police. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner who is a senior citizen and differently abled person is the owner of the said Auto and he has been falsely implicated in this case and that he has been suffering incarceration for more than 40 days from 02.05.2023. He would further submit that the alleged contraband was recovered only from A1. However, on instructions he would submit that without prejudice to his defence, the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit a substantial amount to any Charitable Institution as may be directed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that the petitioner/A2 along with another accused was found in possession of 1.200 Kgs. of Ganja and he has got 4 previous cases out of which, one case is similar in nature. The respondent has filed a detailed counter.

5. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record including the FIR and counter.

6. On considering the voluntary submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) by way of RTGS/NEFT to the credit of "The Advocate Clerks Association, Ponneri" without prejudice to her rights and contentions before the trial Court.

7. Merely, because the petitioner has deposits the said amount, it would not amount to admission of his guilt. Therefore, it is open to the trial Court to deal with the case independently.

3/6

8. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant of bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

9. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to make a non refundable deposit of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) by way of RTGS/NEFT to the credit of "The Advocate Clerks Association, Ponneri" without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court, on such deposit and production of proof, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate II, Ponneri, 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;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

4/6

[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 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

13.06.2023 ksa-2 To

1. The Judicial Magistrate II, Ponneri

2. The Inspector of Police M-4, Redhills Police Station Chennai

3. The Central Prison for Men, Puzhal, Chennai

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J., ksa-2 13.06.2023 6/6