Ravi v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 24/09/2021 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice G.R.SWAMINATHAN Ravi ... Petitioner/Accused(Rank Not Known) Vs The State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Athoor Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

Crime No.137 of 2019.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.T.S.R.VENKATARAMANA, Advocate for Mr.R.ANAND, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.E.ANTONY SAHAYA PRABAKAR, Additional Public Prosecutor(crl.side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C.

PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.137 of 2019 on the file of the Respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

2. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.5. He was arrested and remanded to Judicial Custody on 21.08.2019 for the offences punishable under sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1) and 25 of NDPS Act, in Crime No.137 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police. He seeks bail.

3. The case involves seizure of 294 Kgs of ganja. When the police personnel attached to the respondent police station were on their usual rounds on 21.08.2019 at about 3.00 a.m., at Athoor to Seranthapoomangalam road near V.V.Mineral Company, they intercepted a vehicle and found the contraband hidden therein.

4. The case was registered on 21.08.2019. The final report has been filed and it has been taken on file as C.C.No.97 of 2020 on the 1/3

file of the Special Court for NDPS cases, Madurai on 23.03.2020. When the petitioner earlier filed Crl.O.P.(MD)No.19106 of 2019, it was dismissed on 19.12.2019. The subsequent petitions for bail have also been negatived on various dates. The present petition has been filed by citing the grant of bail for the fourth accused vide order dated 13.08.2020 in Crl.O.P(MD)No.9998 of 2021. The only allegation against the petitioner herein namely Ravi is that he accompanied the fourth accused. When the fourth accused himself had been granted bail, there is no justification in taking a different stand in the case of the petitioner.

5. At this stage, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor brought it to the court notice that the mobile phone seized from the petitioner has been sent for examination to the forensic lab. From the confession, it appears that the petitioner was in contact with the main accused namely Lakshmanan. But the fact remains that as on date, there is no material. If any adverse material is available to show the guilt of the petitioner later, it is always open to the prosecution to move this Court for cancellation of bail now granted. Since as on date, there is no material to link the petitioner with the crime in question, I have to necessarily render a finding that the petitioner is not likely to have committed the offence in question. The petitioner has thus crossed one barrier erected by Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

I have to now consider if the petitioner is likely to commit any offence after coming out on bail. This question again need not detain me because the petitioner is not having any previous case. He has never come under any adverse police case on any occasion. Therefore the petitioner is not likely to commit any offence after coming out on bail. Thus, both the conditions set out in Section 37 of the NDPS Act stands fulfilled in this case. The petitioner is therefore granted bail. I make it clear that the reasons which have been impelled me to grant bail will not enure to the petitioner's advantage during trial. The learned trial judge will consider the entire evidence adduced by the prosecution and pronounce on the guilt or innocence of the petitioner.

6. In view of the above, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with certain conditions. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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 leanred Additional Principal Special Sessions Judge for EC & NDPS Act Cases, Madurai and on further conditions that:- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity. [b] the petitioner shall report before the Inspector of Police, Vedaranyam Police Station daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action 2/3

against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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]. sd/- 24/09/2021 / TRUE COPY / / /2021 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

TO 1.THE ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL SPECIAL SESSIONS JUDGE FOR EC & NDPS ACT CASES, MADURAI.

2.THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI.

3.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ATHOOR POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.

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

COPY TO:

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VEDARANYAM POLICE STATION, VEDARANYAM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.13818 of 2021 Date :24/09/2021 SA/PN/SAR.3/27.09.2021/3P/6C 3/3