Ranjith v. The Inspector Of Police

CRL OP(MD). No.6420 of 2023 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10/04/2023 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD). No.6420 of 2023 Ranjith, ... Petitioner/Accused No.20 Vs The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Dhadikombu Police Station, Dhadikombu, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.224/2022).

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Pragalathan N, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor.

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C.

PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.224 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.20, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.07.2022 for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(c) 25 of NDPS Act in Crime No.224 of 2022 on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent/complainant received secret information from an informer and the Sub-Inspector of Police along with four others went to the scene of occurrence shrouded with Kattukaruvel Trees at EB Colony, Chettinayackanpatti, Dindigul at 02.00 p.m, and they found four persons trying to separate a consignment being dropped from a gunny bag and when they tried to run away on seeing the Police, they were captured and during enquiry, they said that they procured the consignment from Andhra Pradesh and kept them for retail sales. The Police searched the gunny bag and found a Kakki paper-wrapped parcel and a polythene bag was found, wherein the contraband of Ganja was found weighing 34 kgs of Ganja. The respondent Police arrested the accused and recorded the confession statement of the first accused, and the respondent Police registered against 10 named accused. On 30.07.2022, the respondent Police arrested the petitioner and remanded to judicial custody. Now, there are totally 20 accused including the petitioner.

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

CRL OP(MD). No.6420 of 2023

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely roped in this case and there is no material to connect the accused with the alleged crime.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner is a close associate with others accused in this case and the petitioner along with other accused actively involved in drug trafficking and opposed for granting bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard. Perused the materials available on record, including the First Information Report.

6. There are totally 20 accused in which the petitioner is arraigned as Accused No.20. Similarly placed co-accused, namely A.12 and A.15, have filed bail applications before this Court in Crl.O.P (MD)Nos.19077 of 2022, 5204 of 2023, 16039 of 2022 and 22280 of 2022 and the same were dismissed. According to the case of the prosecution, A.12 had contacted A.1 on so many times. Thereafter, the petitioner contacted A.12. As far as the petitioner is concerned, he had specific overt act and he along with other accused was found in possession of 36.200 kgs of Ganja. That apart, the petitioner failed to fulfil the twin conditions as contemplated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

sd/- 10/04/2023 / TRUE COPY / /04/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

PS TO 1 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL JAIL, MADURAI.

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DHADIKOMBU POLICE STATION, DHADIKOMBU, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.

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

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.6420 of 2023 Date :10/04/2023 SA/SSS/SAR.3/13.04.2023/2P/4C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2