Shaik Jarina@Manju v. The State Rep By Its,

P.DHANABAL, J.

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner/A1 who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 17.05.2024, seeking bail in Crime No.166 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with her husband were standing near the Tambaram Railway Station in a suspicious manner. During the enquiry, the respondent police found that they were in illegal possession of 22.300 kgs of ganja. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that this is the fourth bail petition filed by the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner is a resident of Andhra Pradesh and had travelled to Chennai along with her husband for their personal family commitment. He would further submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he

has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR, He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 17.05.2024 and he is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police raised an objection stating that the petitioner, along with other accused was found in possession of 22.300 kgs of ganja, which is a commercial quantity. He further submitted that based on the confession statement of the accused persons, it was revealed that they went to Andhra Pradesh, purchased the contraband and sold the same in Tamil Nadu for their personal gain. He further submitted that the petitioner has two previous cases, similar in nature, pending against him. He further submitted that investigation is completed and the charge sheet has also been filed.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and also perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the representation made by both side counsel, the quantity involved in this case is a commercial quantity, the petitioner has two previous cases, similar in nature, pending against him, investigation was completed and the charge sheet was also filed, and the case is posted for trial, and already this court dismissed the earlier bail application and there is no change of circumstances, therefore at this stage, it is not appropriate to consider the bail application of the petitioner. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

7. Since the case is pending for a long time, it is appropriate to direct the Trial Judge to complete the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

27.11.2024 drl

P.DHANABAL, J.

drl 27.11.2024