High Court · 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 19/03/2025PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVELCRL OP (MD) No.3431 of 2025J.Pandiarajan,S/o Jeevanantham, Kumaransalai, Keelathoppu, Sellur, Madurai. ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 VsThe State of Tamil Nadu,Rep. by the Inspector of Police,S.S.Colony Police Station, Madurai District. Crime No. 227/2024. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Rajasekaran.S, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.R.Meenaksihi Sundaram, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis PRAYER :- To release the petitioner/Accused No.2 on bail in the case in C.C.No.395 of 2024and the same is pending on the file of the Principal Special court for cases underEC and Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances Act, Madurai in connection withCrime No.227 of 2024 on the file of the respondent-police.ORDER : The Court made the following order :-This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 20.02.2025under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying togrant bail.2. The petitioner / Accused No.2 was arrested and remanded to judicialcustody on 17.08.2024. The petitioner is facing trial in C.C.No.395 of 2024 on the fileof the learned Principal Special Judge, Principal Special court for cases under EC andNarcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances Act, Madurai for the offencespunishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985 inconnection with Crime No.227 of 2024 on the file of the respondent-police.2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 02.05.2024, at about 18.50 hours, basedon secret information received, the respondent-police were conducting a vehiclecheck-up near Viratipathu Union Office, Madurai, on Kalavasal to Theni Main Road.At that time, the police found that Accused No.1 was in possession of 1.600 kgs ofganja in a Ford Aspire car bearing Registration No. TN-58-AL-9513. The respondent-police arrested Accused No.1 and seized the contraband. Based on the confession ofAccused No.1, on 15.05.2024, A3, A4 and A5 were arrested, and the respondent-police seized 13.500 kgs of ganja from them. Following the same, on 18.05.2024, nearthe entrance of the Omni Bus Stand, Mattuthavani, A6, A7, and A8, were arrested,and 8.500 kgs of ganja was seized from A6 and A7. The further case of theprosecution against the petitioner is that the petitioner/A2, along with other accusedpersons, purchased the ganja and gave it to A1, A3, A4, and A5 for illegal sale.Hence, the case.4. Mr.S.Rajasekaran, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that thepetitioner has nothing to do with the alleged offence and that a false case has beenfoisted against the petitioner. He further submits that initially, the petitioner wasgranted pre-arrest bail, later, he was arrested on 17.08.2024. He further submits thatno contraband was recovered from the petitioner herein. He further submits that3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 17.08.2024 and is ready to abide byany conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for granting bailto the petitioner.5. Per contra, Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, learned Additional Public Prosecutorappearing for the respondent-police, submits that in this case, 1.500 kgs of ganja wasseized from Accused No.1 on 02.05.2024, 13.500 kgs of ganja was seized fromAccused Nos.3, 4, and 5 on 15.05.2024, and 8.500 kgs of ganja was seized fromAccused Nos.6 and 7 on 18.05.2024, and the petitioner/A2 has a direct connectionwith the other accused persons with regard to the purchase and transportation ofganja. He further submits that there are two previous cases pending against thepetitioner, of which one case is similar in nature. He further submits that there is amoney transaction between the petitioner/A2 and A3 for a sum of Rs.85,500/-. Hefurther submits that since the petitioner and the other accused persons purchased thecontraband with a common intention to sell it illegally and earn money and all therecoveries and seizures arose out of the same course of events and the petitioner hasconnection with the crime, the recovery of ganja from all the accused persons shouldbe taken into account while deciding whether the contraband constitutes acommercial quantity or not, and that the total contraband seized from all the accused4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis persons comes within the category of commercial quantity. Further, he submits thatthe rigors stated in Section 37 of the NDPS Act would be applicable to this case. Herelies upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narcotics Control Bureauv. Mohit Aggarwal, reported in (2022) 18 SCC 374. The learned Additional PublicProsecutor therefore prays to dismiss this Criminal Original Petition. 6. This Court has considered the submission made on either side. 7. A bare perusal of the FIR would show that on 02.05.2024, at about18.50 hours, the respondent-police intercepted the Ford Aspire car of A1 and seized1.600 kgs of ganja from him, which is admittedly an intermediate quantity. A perusalof the Final Report filed by the respondent-police would show that on 15.05.2024 and18.05.2025, the respondent-police arrested other accused persons and seized13.500 kgs. (intermediate quantity) and 8.500 kgs (intermediate quantity) of ganjafrom them respectively. The submission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutoris that since the petitioner/A2 has a direct connection with the other accused personswith regard to the purchase and transportation of ganja, the recoveries of ganja fromthe other accused persons should be taken into account while deciding whether thecontraband constitutes a commercial quantity or not. This Court is not inclined to5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis accept the above submission for the reason that no contraband was recovered fromthe petitioner and the seizures were not made at the same time. Hence, this Court isof the view that the rigors stated in Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not beapplicable to the case. To be noted, the above view is recorded only for the purpose ofdeciding the bail petition. The above view, in any way, would not cause anyprejudice to the rights of the prosecution in establishing the case during the trial. 8. Considering the above, and also considering the fact that the petitioner haspermanent residence, and therefore, there is less possibility of absconding, and alsotaking note of the fact that no contraband was recovered from the petitioner, andwith a view to give one more opportunity to the petitioner to reform himself, thisCourt is inclined to grant an order of bail to the petitioner, however, subject to thefollowing conditions:(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty FiveThousand only) along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.25,000/- (RupeesTwenty Five Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the learned Principal SpecialJudge, Principal Special Court for cases under EC and Narcotic Drugs andPsychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai;6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in theApplication for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules ofPractice, 2019']. The learned Principal Special Judge, Principal Special Court for Casesunder EC and Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai, shallobtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity;(iii) The petitioner shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond tobe executed under Chapter XXXV of BNS, 2023;(iv) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of he isaccused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;(v) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threator promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade himfrom disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with theevidence;(vi) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defactocomplainant, and the witnesses;7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (vii) The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile number tothe learned Principal Special Judge, Principal Special Court for Cases under EC andNarcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai;(viii) The petitioner shall appear and sign before the learned Principal SpecialJudge, Principal Special Court for Cases under EC and Narcotic Drugs andPsychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai, on all working days at 10:30 a.m., untilfurther orders; and(ix) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned PrincipalSpecial Judge, Principal Special Court for Cases under EC and Narcotic Drugs andPsychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai, is entitled to pass appropriate ordersagainst the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions areimposed by him as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State ofKerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283].8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to theconditions stated supra.Sd/- 19/03/2025 / TRUE COPY / 21/03/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. tsg/jenTO1 THE PRINCIPAL SPECIAL JUDGE, PRINCIPAL SPECIAL COURT FOR CASES UNDER EC AND NDPS ACT CASES, MADURAI. 2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI.3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SS COLONY POLICE STAION, MADURAI DISTRICT. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/s.S.RAJASEKARAN, Advocate ( SR-3115[I] dated 19/03/2025 ) ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.3431 of 2025 Date :19/03/2025ES/ 21.03.2025/9P/6CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from17/07/2023. 9/9