Muthukrishnan vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.10.2020 for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 & 29(1) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, pending trial in C.C.No.245 of 2021 on the file of II Addl. Special Judge for NDPS Act, Chennai in Crime No.916 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that on a secret information about the illegal transportation of ganja, the respondent police along with his team conducted a vehicle check-up and intercepted a car. On search, the petitioner along with other accused found in possession of 321.650 kgs. of ganja and seized the same. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is the fourth petition seeking for bail and he is in judicial custody for more than 3 years. He would submit that there is no recovery from this petitioner and he is an innocent person and he is no way connected with the case. He would submit that he has not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police. However, co-accused/A4 was granted bail by the Apex Court in S.L.P. (Crl.) No.3906 of 2023 by an order dated 31.08.2023. He would submit that the investigation is almost completed and he would abide by any condition that may be imposed by this court and no previous case pending against him. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that when the petitioners travelled in a car, the contraband of 321.650 kgs. of ganja was recovered from them. He would submit that totally, 4 accused involved in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A1 in this case. He would submit that there is no previous case pending against him and now the investigation is almost completed and now the case is posted for framing of charges on 25.10.2023. He would submit that if he is released on bail, he would tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

As per the confession of co-accused, this petitioner was found in possession of 31 kgs. of ganja in two big bags and 2 brown colour packets, but in respect of A4, four big bags and 2 brown colour packets was seized. Admittedly, A4 was granted bail by the Apex Court. On considering the long period of incarceration in judicial custody and relying the said proposition, the petitioner prayed bail, who is also in same footage. Therefore, on considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that for nearly 3 years, he was in judicial custody and he has no previous case and he is ready to abide any condition imposed by this court and the final report also filed and now the case is posted for framing of charges on 25.10.2023, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each, in which one surety must be a blood surety for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned II Addl. Special Judge for 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 learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for three months and he shall also appear before the trial court for every hearing without fail and cooperate with the trial proceedings;

(c) the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature;

(d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(e) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(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 5560];

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