High Court · 2025

CRL OP(MD). No.20776 of 2024BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 07/01/2025PRESENTThe HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHCRL OP(MD). No.20776 of 2024Saranya ... Petitioner/Accused No.3VsThe Inspector of Police,Keeraithurai Police Station,Keeraithurai,Madurai District.(Crime No.105 of 2024) ... Respondent/ComplainantFor Petitioner : Mr.J.Sankarapandian, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.S.Ravi, Additional Public ProsecutorPETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSSPRAYER :-For Bail in Crime No. 105 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent Police.ORDER : The Court made the following order :-The petitioner / Accused No.3, who was arrested and remanded to judicialcustody on 07.03.2024 for the offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29(1) ofNDPS Act in Crime No.105 of 2024 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks bail.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.03.2024 at about 13.55 hours, the SubInspector of Police received a secret information that Accused Nos.1 to 3 havehoarded / concealed ganja near Muniyandi Kovil in the woods / shrubs. They also1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.20776 of 2024planned to take away the ganja on the same day at about 02.00 p.m. This informationwas recorded in the general diary and it was intimated to the superior officers andafter obtaining permission, the Police team went to the spot and conducted asurveillance and at that time, Accused Nos.1 to 3 were spotted in that place and uponsearch, 25 kgs of ganja, which was kept in a sack bag, was seized. When AccusedNo.1 was questioned about the same, he disclosed that he has received ganja fromAccused No.4 and pursuant to the same, Accused No.4 was also arrested. There aretotally four accused persons in this case and the petitioner has been arrayed asAccused No.3 and she is the wife of Accused No.1.3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitionerhas nothing to do with the alleged offence. He further submitted that the petitionerhas suffered incarceration in this case from 07.03.2024 and that the petitioner has asmall child aged about 3 ½ years, who is now being taken care by the petitioner'smother. The learned counsel further submitted that there is a substantial delay in thesamples being taken and the same being sent for chemical analysis. The learnedcounsel also relied upon the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.16223 of2024, wherein, Accused No.4 was enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for therespondent Police vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.20776 of 2024ground that twin requirements under Section 37 of the Act has not been satisfied. Hefurther submitted that Accused Nos.1 to 3 were found in the spot and 25 kgs of ganjawas seized and there is absolutely no mandatory violation in this case. He furthersubmitted that Accused Nos.1 to 3 as a family, were engaged in the procurement andsupply of ganja. He further submitted that the grant of bail to Accused No.4 was onthe peculiar facts of the case and the same cannot be taken advantage by thepetitioner. It was further submitted that the case is posted for examination ofwitnesses on 27.01.2025. Hence, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor sought fordismissal of this petition.5. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side andthe materials available on record.6. In the case in hand, the petitioner has been arrayed as Accused No.3 and sheis the wife of Accused No.1. It is the case of the prosecution that ganja was kept in asack bag and it was concealed in the shrubs / woods. When the Search wasconducted based on the secret information, Accused Nos.1 to 3 are alleged to havebeen found in the spot and thereafter, search was conducted and the Sack bag wasseized and it contained 25 kgs of ganja, which is a commercial quantity.7. The grant of bail to Accused No.4 cannot be taken advantage by thepetitioner, since Accused No.4 was roped in this case based on the confession of3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.20776 of 2024Accused No.1 and this Court prima facie found that there is no material againstAccused No.4. Hence, the bail order passed for Accused No.4 was on the peculiarfacts that are applicable only to accused No.4. 8. This Court takes into consideration the fact that the petitioner has sufferedincarceration from 07.03.2024. That apart, there is a small child aged about 3 ½ yearsto be taken care by the petitioner and presently, the child is taken care by the motherof the petitioner. This Court also takes into consideration the interest of the child andthe fact that it will take some more time for the trial to be completed in this case. ThisCourt also takes into consideration the fact that there are no previous cases againstthis petitioner. Hence on the peculiar facts of this case, this Court is inclined toenlarge the petitioner on bail by applying Article 21 of the Constitution of India onthe basis of long incarceration of the petitioner and also considering the interest of thesmall child.9. In view of the above discussion, the criminal original petition is ordered andthe petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum ofRs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to thesatisfaction of the learned Pricipal Special Judge for Trial of NDPS Act Cases,Madurai and on further conditions that:- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.20776 of 2024surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank passBook to ensure their identity.[b] the petitioner shall appear before the trial court daily at 10.30 a.m., untilfurther orders and also during every date of hearing without fail.[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either duringinvestigation or trial.[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/TrialCourt is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance withlaw as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by thelearned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Courtin P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered underSection 269 of BNS, 2023. sd/- 07/01/2025/ TRUE COPY / 07/01/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TSG 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.20776 of 2024TO1 THE JUDGE, PRINCIPAL SPECIAL JUDGE FOR TRIAL OF NDPS ACT CASES, MADURAI.2 THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL WOMEN PRISON, MADURAI.3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KEERAITHURAI POLICE STATION,KEERAITHURAI, MADURAI DISTRICT.4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.20776 of 2024 Date :07/01/2025RS/IT/SAR-(07.01.2025) 6P 5CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/20236/6