AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner / Accused No.2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.07.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(A) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 r/w Sections 229, 231, 217 and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.234 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
The case of the prosecution is that, acting on secret information, the respondent police found the accused in conscious possession of 100 grams of ganja. It is further alleged that the accused was in possession of the said contraband with the intention of selling near a school. Hence, the FIR has been registered by the respondent police.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the contraband involved in this case is not commercial quantity. Hence, Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not applicable to this case. The petitioner has no previous cases. He is in custody from 10.07.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.
The learned Counsel appearing for the State (Criminal Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the investigation is still in progress. He further submitted that the petitioner has no previous cases. He also submitted that, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail at this stage, there is every likelihood of his hampering the investigation and indulging in similar offences. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.
This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, the fact that the quantity of contraband involved is not a commercial quantity and, therefore, the rigour of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, is not attracted and also considering the fact that there are no previous cases against the petitioner and also taking into account the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the jurisdictional Magistrate at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, for a period of three weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation before the respondent police;
[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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 51730].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.