S.Ganesan v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Dated: 24/11/2022 PRESENT The Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.ILANGOVAN Crl.OP(MD)No.18646 of 2022 S.Ganesan : Petitioner/A3 Vs.
The State rep. By the Inspector of Police, NIB-CID Police Station, Thoothukudi District.
(Crime No.8 of 2022) : Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sivabalan for Mr.A.Santhana Sinakarthan For Respondent : Mr.S.Ravi Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C PRAYER:- C-32B.For Bail in Crime No.8 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent Police.
ORDER:- The Court made the following order:- The petitioners in A3 was arrested, on 06/03/2022 and remanded to judicial custody, on 07/03/2022 and for the offences under sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 23(c), 24, 29(1) and 25 of NDPS Act, in Crime No.8 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant on a secrete information along with police team members went to the place of occurrence, on 06/03/2022 at about 3.15 pm. When they were on checking up near Vellapatti seashore area, on suspicion, they searched 3 two wheelers and 1 four wheeler bearing Registration Nos.TN-65-W-5866, TN-69-AE-9414, TN-69L-7529 and TN-69-P-7859 and they found seven persons in the place. On seeing the police party, they tried to escape. They were apprehended.
On enquiry, they revealed their name as Marikumar, Mansoor Ali, Ganeshan, Panner Selvam, Yogeshwaran, Essakimuthu and Vinith. One person escaped by name Anthony Jeyaraj. On search, they were found in possession of the contraband weighing about 471.600 kgs.
came to light. As per the procedure, sampling and other formalities were undertaken and based upon the complaint, the case was registered.
3.Heard both sides.
4.All the grounds that have been raised by the petitioner have been elaborately discussed after coming to the finding that no case has been made out by the petitioner for bail and that was dismissed on 29/08/2022 in 13415 of 2022 batch.
5.Now this petition has been filed on the ground that the petitioner was arrested and not produced before the concerned Magistrate within 24 hours. Apart from this, it is also mentioned that before registration of the FIR, crime number is mentioned in the seizure mahazar, etc.
6.With regard to the above said contention, there was illegal detention after the arrest. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that only preliminary enquiry was undertaken on the spot itself
before the arrest. He would further submit that he was arrested at about 9.40 pm on 06/03/2022 and within 24 hours, he was produced before the concerned Magistrate Court. So according to him, there was no illegal detention.
7.Whether there was any illegal detention and whether the arrest was made at 9.40 pm is a matter for consideration during the course of trial.
8.Now the final report has been filed and taken cognizance and the co-ordinate Bench of this court as mentioned earlier, has given a direction in Crl.OP(MD)No. 16796 of 2022, dated 07/11/2022 to the Special Court to complete trial process and dispose of the case in CC No. 833 of 2022 within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. So that order squarely applies to the petitioner also. So I find no change of circumstance and the contention raised by the petitioner deserves no acceptance.
9.In the result, the criminal original petition is dismissed.
24/11/2022 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No er To, 1.The Inspector of Police, NIB-CID Police Station, Thoothukudi District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
G.ILANGOVAN,J er Crl.OP(MD)No.18646 of 2022 24/11/2022