Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/2898/2024disposed of

Srinivasa Rathinam v. The Inspector Of Police

2024-02-26Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Twenty Sixth day of February Two Thousand and Twenty Four PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI SRINIVASA RATHINAM ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.1 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PEW, TRICHY CITY POLICE STATION, TRICHY.

CR.NO.694/2023 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : MR. M.SURESH , Advocate For Respondent : MR.B.NAMBISELVAN, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

PRAYER:

FOR BAIL IN CRIME NO. 694/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE RESPONDENT POLICE.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.09.2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w. 20(b)(ii)(c) and 25 of 1/4

NDPS Act, 1985 in Crime No.694 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that based on the secrete information received, the respondent police conducted search in Srirengam Bus Stand and during that time, the petitioner and the other accused came in two wheeler there. On search, it was found that the petitioner and the other accused person were in illegal possession of 2 kgs of Ganja. Based on the confession statement, 20 kgs of Ganja were recovered from the petitioner and the other accused persons. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 14.09.2023. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the quantity involved in this case is a commercial quantity and the petitioner has not satisfied the twin conditions required under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity and the petitioner has not 2/4

satisfied the twin conditions as required under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the charge sheet has been filed before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Court for E.C. and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai, and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.3 of 2024 and this Court may direct the trial Court to dispose of the case in C.C.No.3 of 2024.

7. In view of the same, the trial Court is directed to dispose of C.C.No.3 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sd/- 26/02/2024 / TRUE COPY / /03/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.I /II /III /IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

SSB TO THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE/ SPECIAL COURT FOR EC AND NDPS ACT CASES, PUDUKKOTTAI.

3/4

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE PEW, TRICHY CITY POLICE STATION, TRICHY.

THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY.

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

ORDER

IN Date :26/02/2024 PKP/GS/SAR /01.04.2024/ 4P/ 5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4