Shalini v. The Inspector Of Police

CRL OP(MD). No.3233 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17/10/2022 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice A.A.NAKKIRAN CRL OP(MD). No.3233 of 2022 Shalini ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, NIBCID, Madurai, (Originally Registered as Crime No.344/2021 by the Inspector of Police, Arumanai Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

(Crime No.344/2021).

... Respondent/Respondent For Petitioner :

M/s.Anand R, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYE :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.344 of 2021 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 of the NDPS Act, in Crime No.344 of 2021, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 20.06.2021, on secret information the respondent Police conducted inspection in the vehicle of the accused persons and found the illegal possession of 100 pockets of ganja, weighing 210kgs. Hence, the complaint.

3. On the side of the petitioner, it is stated that the petitioner is innocent and she had not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner is arrayed as A2. A1 is the main culprit and there is no evidence to connect the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

CRL OP(MD). No.3233 of 2022 petitioner with the offence. This is the second petition. She will co-operate with the investigation and ready to abide any conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, prays to release her on bail.

4. On the side of prosecution, it is stated that the first petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on merits. As per the statement received from the house owner of the petitioner, it reveal the fact that A1, A2 executed rental agreement, as if, both are husband and wife and total contraband was seized from the vehicle parked in the portico of the house. There is no change in circumstances and custodial interrogation of the accused is necessary to proceed further. Hence, prays to dismiss the petition.

5.Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, alleged commercial quantity of contraband and also considering the strong objection raised by the prosecution that there is no change in circumstances and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary in this case, this petitioner is not entitled to exercise any discretionary relief from this Court.

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

sd/- 17/10/2022 / TRUE COPY / /10/2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NIBCID, MADURAI, (ORIGINALLY REGISTERED AS CRIME NO.344/2021 BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ARUMANAI POLICE STATION, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT.

2. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.3233 of 2022 Date :17/10/2022 pnm USK/VR/SAR-I/20.10.2022/2P/3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2