Rajkiran @ Barath v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20.06.2025 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI Rajkiran @ Barath, S/o.Uthayakumar

...Petitioner / Accused No.2

Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Ramji Nagar Police Station, Trichy District.

(Crime No.157 of 2022) ... Respondent/ Complainant For Petitioner :

Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed, Advocate.

For Respondent :

Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS, 2023. PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.157 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police. 1/5

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.06.2025 for the offences under Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in Crime No.157 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the Sub-Inspector of Police attached to the respondent police station. On 15.07.2022 at about 12:45 p.m., while the defacto complainant and other police officials were patrolling near Ramji Nagar Mariammankovil Street in connection with reports of ganja sales, they found the first accused in possession of certain materials. Upon seeing the police party, the first accused, Arumugam, attempted to flee but was apprehended. Upon search, 1.100 kgm of ganja was recovered from him. Based on the confession given by A1, the second accused (A2) was also arrayed as an accused, as A1 had allegedly received the contraband from A2. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that a false case has been foisted against the petitioner. He would further submit that there was no recovery from the petitioner, and he has been implicated in this case only based on the confession given by A1. He would further 2/5

submit that the petitioner is in custody from 03.06.2025. Hence, he seeks bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that there are totally two accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed as A2. He would further submit that the petitioner had already filed an anticipatory bail petition in Cr.M.P. No. 3421 of 2024 before the learned Special Court for E.C. and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai, and the same was allowed on 24.07.2024 with certain conditions. However, due to non-compliance with those conditions, the petitioner was arrested. He would further submit that most of the investigation in this case has been completed, and the charge sheet is going to be filed. Therefore, he opposes the grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court has heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner and also taking into consideration the period of incarceration and also taking note the quantity of the contraband allegedly seized in this case, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, however, subject to the following conditions:

7. 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 3/5

for a like sum to the satisfaction of learned Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai, 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 furnish his residential address and mobile number to the learned Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai. If the petitioner changes his residential address, he shall report the same to the learned Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai.

[c] the petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action 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]. 4/5

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

8. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to the conditions stated supra.

sd/- 20/06/2025 / TRUE COPY / 20/06/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

PAL TO 1 THE JUDGE, SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF NDPS ACT CASES, PUDUKKOTTAI.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RAMJI NAGAR POLICE STATION, TRICHY DISTRICT.

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

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10327 of 2025 Date :20/06/2025 SA/SAR. /20.06.2025/5P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023. 5/5