Isakkimuthu vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 17.10.2022 for the alleged offence under Sections 8(c), r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act, 1985 in Crime No.35 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of prosecution is that on receipt of secret information about illegal sale of ganja at Chengalpet Bus stand, the respondent police along with his team went to the scene of occurrence and intercepted the petitioner. On search, he was found in possession of 2 kgs. packets each weighing about 10 kdgs and on further search, 2 kgs. packets weighing 12 kgs., totally 22 kgs. of ganja, which was seized by them. Accordingly, the complaint was registered against the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is second petition seeking for bail and he is in custody for more than 8 months. He would further submit that he is no way connected with the offence and he has not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police. He would submit that now the final report was filed and furthermore, the alleged recovery of 22 kgs. of ganja in two separate packets. He would submit that he has been falsely implicated by the respondent police in this case and he is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and so far, there is no progress in the trial. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that from the petitioner, totally 22 kgs. of contraband in two separate packets were recovered, which is a commercial quantity. However, now the investigation is almost completed and the charge sheet was filed. He would submit that one previous case similar in nature pending against him, which is a small quantity and he is in custody for more than 8 months. He would submit that if he is released on bail, he would hamper the investigation and tamper the witnesses Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

Considering the above facts and circumstances and also the fact that he is suffering incarceration for more than 8 months and the fact that now investigation is almost completed, charge sheet was filed, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, in which, one surety must be a blood surety, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal Special Judge, Principal Special Court under EC & NDPS Act, Chennai 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 stay at Kancheepuram and appear before the respondent police on every Tuesday and Sunday at 10.30 a.m. for the period of two months and he shall also appear before the trial court for every hearing without fail;

(c) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation 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/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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]; and;

(f) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.