High Court · 2025

CRL OP (MD) No.5224 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 09.04.2025PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVELCRL OP (MD) No.5224 of 2025Akash ... Petitioner/Rank Not Known VsThe State of Tamil NaduRep. by The Inspector of Police,PEW, Madurai City Police Station,Madurai City.Crime No.1 of 2025 ... Respondent/ComplainantFor Petitioner: Mr.N.Balasubramanian AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public PRosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSSPRAYER :-For Bail in Crime No.1 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.5224 of 2025ORDER : The Court made the following order :-This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 19.03.2025under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying togrant bail.2. The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.01.2025for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 22(b), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act,1985 in Crime No.1 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.3. The case of the prosecution is that, on 01.01.2025, at about 08:45 hours, basedon secret information received, the respondent-police were on surveillance nearPandian Nagar Junction at Theppakulam, Madurai District, where an Innova carbearing Registration No.TN-01-AQ-6102, in which A1 was present, was parked. Therespondent-police apprehended him. Upon investigation, the respondent-policefound that A1 was in possession of 28 grams of methamphetamine, which wassubsequently seized. Based on the confession of A1, the petitioner was arrayed as A6and arrested on 06.01.2025. At the time of arrest, the petitioner/A6 was found inpossession of 27 grams of methamphetamine. Hence, the case.2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.5224 of 20254. Mr.N.Balasubramanian, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits thatthe petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged offence and has been falselyimplicated in this case. He, however, submits that the petitioner is ready to abide byany conditions imposed by this Court. He further submits that the quantity ofmethamphetamine found in the possession of petitioner is less than the commercialquantity. He also submits that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since06.01.2025. Hence, he prays for granting bail to the petitioner.5. Per contra, Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, the learned Additional PublicProsecutor appearing for the respondent-police, submits that when the respondent-police were on surveillance, they noticed that A1 was found in possession of 28grams of methamphetamine. Thereafter, A1 was arrested, and a case was registeredagainst five accused persons, including the petitioner. He further submits that basedon the information given by A1, the respondent-police arrested the other accusedpersons and recovered 27 grams of methamphetamine from them. He further submitsthat the accused persons purchased the contraband with a common intention to sell itillegally and earn money. Therefore, the total contraband seized from the accusedpersons comes under the category of commercial quantity. Further, he submits that3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.5224 of 2025the 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 prays for dismissal of this petition.6. This Court has considered the submission made on either side and perusedthe records. 7. A bare perusal of the FIR shows that on 01.01.2025, the respondent-policeseized 28 grams of methamphetamine from A1, which is admittedly an intermediatequantity. Additionally, on 06.01.2025, when the respondent-police arrested thepetitioner and other accused persons, they were found in possession of 27 grams ofmethamphetamine, which is also admittedly an intermediate quantity. Thesubmission of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor is that the recovery ofmethamphetamine from A1 should be taken into account while deciding whether thecontraband constitutes a commercial quantity or not. However, this Court is notinclined to accept the above submission for the reason that the seizures were notmade at the same time. Hence, this Court is of the view that the quantity ofmethamphetamine recovered from the petitioner and other accused persons is4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.5224 of 2025intermediate, and the rigors stated in Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not beapplicable to this case. To be noted, the above view is recorded only for the purposeof deciding the bail petition. The above view, in any way, would not cause prejudiceto the rights of the prosecution in establishing the case during the trial.8. Considering the above, and also considering the facts that the petitioner haspermanent residence, and therefore, there is less possibility of absconding, and with aview to give an opportunity to the petitioner to reform himself, this Court is inclinedto grant an order of bail to the petitioner, however, subject to the followingconditions:(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, Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai;(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, Special Court for Trial of NDPS5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.5224 of 2025Act Cases, Madurai, shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure theiridentity;(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;(vii) The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile number tothe learned Principal Special Judge, Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases,Madurai;6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.5224 of 2025(viii) The petitioner shall appear and sign before the learned Principal SpecialJudge, Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai on all working days at10:30 a.m., until further orders; and(ix) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned PrincipalSpecial Judge, Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, is entitled to passappropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if theaforementioned conditions are imposed by him as laid down by the Hon'ble SupremeCourt in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283].9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to theconditions stated supra. sd/- 09/04/2025 / TRUE COPY / 09/04/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar () Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. MBITO1 THE PRINCIPAL SPECIAL JUDGESPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL OF NDPS ACT CASES, MADURAI.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.5224 of 20252 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,PEW MADURAI CITY POLICE STATION,MADURAI CITY.3 THE SUPERINTENDENTCENTRAL JAIL MADURAI.4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.5224 of 2025 Date :09/04/2025 SS/SAR- /09/04/2025/ 8P/5CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 8/8