Nagavali v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.10.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Nagavali

...Petitioner/sole Accused

Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police, P-2 Otteri Police Station Chennai.

Cr.No. 888 of 2024

...Respondent/Complainant

PRAYER:

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No. 888 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police.

*** For Petitioner : Mr. P.Banupriya For Respondent : Mr.S. Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/6

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.09.2024 for the offences under Sections 24(1) of Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act 2003 and 77 of JJ Act and Section 123 of BNS, in Crime No.888 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in illegal possession of banned tobacco products worth about Rs.900/-. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person, he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution, and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he is a law-abiding citizen and he is ready to furnish substantial sureties for his due release on bail; therefore, he prays for the grant of bail to the petitioner.

2/6

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.09.2024 for the illegal possession of banned tobacco products worth about Rs.900/- and hence he objected to grant bail to the petitioner. He further submitted that there are 20 previous cases against the petitioner against the petitioner and the contraband was recovered.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and considering the nature of offences and the quantity of the contraband recovered and that though the petitioner is having some previous cases, in all those cases, he was granted bail and also considering the period of incarceration underwent by the petitioner, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a]. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand 3/6

only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the court of X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the Mahabalipuram Police Station daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] The petitioner shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond;

[d] The petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;

[e] The petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[f] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with evidence;

4/6

[g] 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 in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; and [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of the BNS.

01.10.2024 vsg To

1. X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. 2.Women Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

3.The Inspector of Police, P-2 Otteri Police Station Chennai.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

P.DHANABAL, J.

vsg 01.10.2024 6/6