Rani v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Wednesday, the Tenth day of February Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr Justice P.N.PRAKASH CRL OP(MD) No.2429 of 2016 RANI ..PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 Vs.
STATE REP.BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CUMBUM NORTH POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT.
CR. NO.630/2015 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S S.MAHENDRAPATHY Advocate For Respondent : MR.A.P.BALASUBRAMANI, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehended arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 8(c) 4/2 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.630 of 2015, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. Heard Mr.S.Mahendrapathy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner / 2nd Accused and Mr.A.P.Balasubramani, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the State.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 31.12.2015, one Arun Kumar / 1st Accused, who is the son of the petitioner herein, was found in possession of 4 Kgs., of Ganja and for which he was arrested and enlarged on bail subsequently. Based on the confession statement given by him, his mother / petitioner herein has been implicated in this case.
4. Taking into consideration the fact that on the confession statement given by Arun Kumar / 1st Accused, the petitioner herein has been implicated in this case, this Court is of the view that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner / 2nd Accused. Accordingly, she is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Additional District Judge of Principal Special Court for EC & NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, on condition that the petitioner / 2nd Accused shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:
(i) the petitioner / 2nd Accused shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for interrogation until further orders.
(ii) the petitioner / 2nd Accused shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
(iii) the petitioner / 2nd Accused shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. (iv) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner / 2nd Accused in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner / 2nd Accused 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].
5. The Inspector of Police concerned is directed to send a compliance report to the office of the learned Government Advocate, as to whether the petitioner is complying with the conditions or not. sd/- 10/02/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar TO 1 THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE OF PRINCIPAL SPECIAL COURT FOR EC AND NDPS ACT CASES, MADURAI.
2 -DO-THRO' THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE MADURAI.
3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CUMBUM NORTH POLICE STATION, THENI DISTRICT.
+1. CC to M/S S.MAHENDRAPATHY Advocate SR.No.7987 akm/11.02.2016/2p-6c/NGM/SS/SAR-I
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.2429 of 2016 Date :10/02/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/