Vijay v. The State Rep By

Crl.O.P.No.28513 of 2023 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent Police, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act in Crime No.524 of 2023, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The petitioners are arrayed as A5, A6 and A4. The first and Second petitioners have been taken into custody and therefore, the issue of anticipatory bail would not arise and this petition stands dismissed as against the petitioners 1 and 2.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out the order dated 08.12.2023, in Crl.O.P.Nos.27635 and 27663 of 2023, wherein, the other coaccused had been granted bail by this Court. 4.The learned Government Advocate (crl.side) filed counter affidavit and stated that insofar as the third petitioner /A4 is concerned, there are four previous cases against him. It is also stated that the third petitioner/A4 had purchased Ganja to sell it through the other accused to the general public. Therefore, strong objections have been raised for grant of any relief to the third petitioner/A4.

1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

vkr 5.The learned counsel for the petitioners however stated that this Court had examined the case of the co-accused in aforementioned two criminal original petitions and had granted bail to them on 08.12.2023. 6.But however, it is seen that the third petitioner/ A4 is the main supplier of Ganja and there are also four previous cases, out of which, one is under Section 392 IPC and an other is under Section 302 IPC. 7.Taking all those factors into consideration, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the third petitioner/A4. 8.Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as against all these petitioners.

29.01.2024 vkr Crl.O.P.No.28513 of 2023 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis