Saheer v. State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

1. SAHEER S/o. Hussain, No. Cherukuzhiyil, Ateeri, Othukkungal, Malappuram, Puthur Kottakkal, Kerala-676 503.

2. Mohammed Bilal S/o. Sainudeen, No. Pokkaldilath House, Krishnapuram, Kalathode, Thirissur, Kerala - 680 655.

Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. By, The Inspector of Police Ranipet PEW Police Station, Ranipet.

Spl. CC. No.141/2024 (Cr. No.492/2024) Respondent(s) 1/5

PRAYER To enlarge the Petitioners/accused on bail in Spl.CC.No.141/2024 on the file of the Trail pending in Special EC/NDPS Judge at Salem. For Petitioner(s):

M/s.P.Abdul Navid For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Gopinath, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 07.06.2024 for the alleged offence under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) & 29(1) of NDPS Act, pending trial in Spl. C.C.No. 141 of 2024 pending on the file of Special Judge for EC/NDPS Act Court at Salem in Crime No.492 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.06.2024 based on a secret information, when the respondent police went to Thangalai Railway Station at 14.30 hours, they intercepted the petitioner, however, on seeing them, they tried to escape from there and they caught hold of them. On search, they found that the petitioners along with other accused were in possession of 30 kgs. of ganja and seized the same. Hence, the complaint.

2/5

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they are in judicial custody from 07.03.2024 for more than 1 year and 5 months. He would submit that there is no specific overtact attributed against the petitioners. He would submit that they have not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police and they are no way connected with the occurrence. He would submit that no previous case pending against them and they are falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and there is no recovery from this petitioner. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that totally, 30 kgs. of ganja was recovered from the scene of occurrence, which is a commercial quantity. He would submit that there are 6 previous cases pending against him and they are native of Kerala. He would submit that totally two accused involved in this case and they are arrayed as A1 and A2. He would submit that at this stage, if they are released on bail, they may abscond and they will tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation and investigation is not yet completed. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by both counsel and also considering gravity of offence 3/5

committed by the petitioners and the contraband of 30 kgs. of ganja recovered, which is a commercial quantity and there are 6 previous cases similar in nature pending against them and also the fact that they are native of Kerala and also considering the fact that if they are released on bail, there is possibility of tampering the witnesses and hampering the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

11-09-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rpp To

1. Special Judge for EC/NDPS Act Court, Salem.

2. The Inspector of Police, Ranipet PEW Police Station, Ranipet.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 4/5

T.V.THAMILSELVI J.

rpp CRL OP No. 21993 of 11-09-2025 5/5