Ramachandran @ M.G.Rama v. The State Rep By Its,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.09.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Ramachandran @ MG.Rama ... Petitioner Vs.
The State represented by, The Station House Officer, Lawspet Police Station, Puducherry.
(Crime No.127 of 2022) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in Crime No.127 of 2022, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Suresh For Respondent : Mr.V.Balamurugane Public Prosecutor, Puducherry.
1/6
O R D E R
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.07.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) & 8(c) of NDPS Act and 77 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, in Crime No.127 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 28.07.2022, on receipt of the secret information about selling Ganja to the juveniles school and college students, the respondent Police went to the scene of occurrence and on seeing police, the accused persons trying to escape from that place and immediately, the police caught hold of the accused persons and found that they were in possession of 1.158 kilograms of Ganja. Hence the Complaint.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and since, he stand near the first accused, he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has been arrested and he in custody from 29.07.2022 and 2/6
thereby, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.
4. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor, Puducherry appearing for the respondent would submit that the respondent police have found the petitioner and the two other accused were in possession of 1.158 kilograms of Ganja and the respondent Police have arrested the accused and recovered the above said contraband from them. He would also submit that there is no previous case as against the petitioner. However, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
3/6
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned III Additional District Judge, Puducherry, 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 daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;
[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 petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court 4/6
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.
15.09.2022 ham To
1. The III Additional District Judge, Puducherry.
2. The Station House Officer, Lawspet Police Station, Puducherry.
3. The Central Prison, Kalapet, Puducherry.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
5/6
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA., J.
ham 15.09.2022 6/6