Prasath v. State Rep.By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 06.11.2020 CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL.O.P.No.16736 of 2020 Prasath ... Petitioner Vs.
State Rep by ... Respondent The Inspector of Police, V-5 Virugampakkam Police Station, Virugampakkam, Chennai.
(Crime No.566 of 2020) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code to grant bail to the petitioner who was arrested in Crime No.566 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.Adinarayana Rao For Respondent : Mr.T.Shunmugarajeswaran Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
(The cases have been heard through video conference) The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.08.2020 for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) r/w 20 (b) (ii) (B) NDPS Act 1985, in Crime No.566 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2.The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant Sub Inspector of Police attached to the respondent police station is that on 23.08.2020, he received a confidential information that some people were selling Ganja near Prince Park Hotel, Ponniyamman Koil Street and thereby, he along with his police party were watching the movement at the location. At about 2.30 p.m. one Prithviraj, Eszhilarasan, Saisudhan and the petitioner were intercepted and on verification, the said Prithviraj was found in possession of 4 kgs. of Ganja in a small polythene bag and cash of Rs.6,000/-. Based on further information, the respondent police went to Velayudham Colony and apprehended one Abdul Razak, Hari
Vignesh and one Rahul and recovered another 5 kgs of Ganja from them and on the statement of said Abdul Razak, the respondent went to SBI Colony and arrested one Vijay Yuvaraj and the case was registered under the provisions of NDPS Act. On the next day i.e. 24.10.2020, based on the information from the arrested accused, Ubaiyuthulla, David Franco, Vignesh @ Haribabu and Nuthaki Issac were arrested and 10 kgs of Ganja was recovered from them. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case since he happens to be the friend of one Prithviraj. He would further submit the petitioner is a student studying final year in Mohamad Sathak College, Sholinganallur.
He would submit that since, the petitioner and the said Prithviraj are from same area, he had accompanied the said Prithviraj and that he was not aware of the antecedents and the activities of the said Prithiviraj. Ever as per the prosecution, the first contraband was recovered from the said Prithviraj and only based on his statement, the other accused were arrested and the contrabands are stated to have been recovered from various locations. He would further submit that the main accused has been granted bail by the Special Court in Crl.M.P.No.1532 of 2020 dated 28.10.2020 and that the other accused have also been granted bail by the Special Court vide Crl.M.P.Nos.1517, 1557, 1558, 1532, 1559 of 2020 dated 28.10.2020 and vide Crl.O.P.No.1618 of 2020 dated 29.10.2020 and Crl.O.P.No.1541 of 2020 dated 14.10.2020.
Hence, he prays for grant of bail.
4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would vehemently oppose stating that the petitioner along with other accused had involved in selling of Ganja and that totally 18 kgs. of Ganja, two motor cycles, two electronic weighing machines and 10 mobiles phones have been recovered and there is no previous case against the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned Counsel on either side. Perused the materials placed on recored.
6.Taking into consideration of the facts and submissions made by the learned counsels and the fact that there is no previous case against the petitioner and the co-accused have been granted bail by the Special Court and also considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: (a) Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute 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 XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, and on further conditions that: (b) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;
(c) the petitioner on his release from prison shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.
(d) the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature;
(e) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(f) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(g) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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];
(h) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
7.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is ordered.
-sd/- 06/11/2020 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.
TO 1 THE XXIII METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI 2 THE CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, EGMORE, CHENNAI. [FOR INFORMATION] 3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, V-5 VIRUGAMBAKKAM POLICE STATION, VIRUGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI.
5 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, PUZHAL.
CC to M/S.ADINARAYANA RAO Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.16736/2020 Date :06/11/2020 TA-09/11/2020