Pradeep vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Thirumurugan Poondi Police Station, Tiruppur District

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No.513 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with other co-accused, was found in illegal possession of 1.200 kg of Ganja, and twenty numbers of zip-lock covers and two mobile phones were seized from them.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entirely innocent of the allegations and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner has no previous case or criminal antecedents of a similar nature. Pointing out that the quantity of the alleged narcotic substance seized falls squarely under the category of intermediate quantity, and that the petitioner has been under judicial custody since 19.09.2026, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, but does not dispute the fact that the quantity involved is an intermediate quantity and that the petitioner has no previous case.

Considering the fact that the contraband involved falls under the category of intermediate quantity, that the stringent rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not attracted to the facts of the present case, and taking note of the period of custody undergone by the petitioner from 19.09.2026 and his clean antecedents, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.\

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Avinashi, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix his photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure his identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10:30 A.M. until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial, and shall not maintain any contact with the witnesses to the occurrence, the officials dealing with the case, or any other person who might be connected to the occurrence;

[e] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.