C.Jeya v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 07.03.2023 PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN CRL OP(MD).Nos.12205 and 12206 of 2022 C.Jeya
...Petitioner/A1 in
Crl.O.P(MD)No.12205 of 2022 C.Chinnadurai
...Petitioner/A2 in
Crl.O.P(MD)No.12206 of 2022 Vs The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Kannivadi Police Station, Dindigul District.
(In Cr.No.151 of 2022)
...Respondent/Complainant
in both petitions For Petitioner : Mr.S.Selvakumar in both petitions Advocate For Respondent in both petitions : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor PETITIONS FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C. COMMON PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.151 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.
COMMON ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who are arrayed as A1 and A2, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B)of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners were found in joint possession of 6 kg of Ganja and on the confession of A3 and A4, it is seen that the petitioners are the main supplier of Ganja. Hence, the case has been registered.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that based on the confession statement of co-accused, the petitioners have been implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the petitioners are the main supplier of Ganja. He further submitted that A1 is having four previous cases and A2 is having three previous cases similar in nature under NDPS Act, and he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact the petitioners are the main supplier of Ganja and they are habitual offender and they are having previous cases of similar in nature, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is very much required in this case, hence this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 7.Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions stand dismissed.
sd/- 07/03/2023 / TRUE COPY / /03/2023 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KANNIVADI POLICE STATION, DINDIGUL DISTRICT.
THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.12205 & 12206 of 2022 Date :07/03/2023 SS/MMS/SAR I/23/03/2023/2P/3C https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis