N Mohammed Syed v. The State Rep B

P.DHANABAL,J.

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B),22(b),25 and 29(1) of Narcotic drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in Crime No.1009 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. Totally there are ten accused in this case and the first and second petitioners herein are A6 and A5 respectively. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners colluded with each other and purchased contraband from A8 and A9 and attempted to sell the same in the market. Hence the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the petitioner is an innocent and a false case has been foisted against him. He would further submit that the petitioners are no way connected with the said occurrence.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would contend that investigation is in initial stage. He 1/3

further submit that if the petitioner is granted anticipatry bail there is every possibility of tampering the evidence. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5.Heard both side and perused the materials available on record. 6.Considering the fact that the investigation is at a initial stage and also considering the gravity of the offence involved in this case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 24.09.2024 smn 2/3

P.DHANABAL,J smn 24.09.2024 3/3