Ibba Suberamanyam v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

This matter came up for hearing today under the caption 'For Being Mentioned' at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2.The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that in the cause-title of the petition the Crime Number has been wrongly typed as "Crime No.619 of 2025" instead of "Crime No.234 of 2025" and the same is also reflected in the order dated 06.08.2025. The learned counsel further submitted that in paragraph No.2 of the order, the recovery is recorded only with regard to A2.

3.In view of the above submission, paragraph 2 of the order dated 06.08.2025 is replaced as follows:

"2.The case of the prosecution is that the first petitioner was found to be in illegal possession of 2 kgs of Ganja and the second petitioner was found to be in illegal possession of 1.100 kgs. of Ganja. Hence, the complaint."

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

Page No.1 of 8

rsi 4.Registry is directed to issue fresh copy of the order dated 06.08.2025 after incorporating the necessary corrections. 08.08.2025 rsi Page No.2 of 8

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06.08.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR 1.Ibba Suberamanyam 2.Jhulima Digal ... Petitioners Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, PEW Tiruppur City Police, Tiruppur. (Crime No.619 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.619 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioners :

M/s.S.Vasavi Sridevi For Respondent :

Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

O R D E R

The petitioners, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985, in Crime No.619 of 2025 on the file Page No.3 of 8

of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that accused were found to be in illegal possession of 1.100 kilo grams of ganja. Hence, the complaint.

3. The contention of the petitioners is that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and hence, he prayed for grant of bail.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed for granting bail to the petitioners. He also submitted that the petitioners have no previous case pending against them.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and taking note of the nature of allegation and the period of incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on Page No.4 of 8

their executing a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties (out of which, one shall be the blood related surety and the another one shall be the local surety), each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tiruppur, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioners shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; [d] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses;

[e] the petitioners to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during Page No.5 of 8

investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

06.08.2025 drl To

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tiruppur.

2. The Inspector of Police, PEW Tiruppur City Police, Tiruppur.

3. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Page No.6 of 8

Coimbatore.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

drl Page No.7 of 8

06.08.2025 Page No.8 of 8