Daniel vs State

K. Rajasekar, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.10.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 123, 278 of BNS and Section 77 of JJ Act in Crime No.131 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that on 11.10.2025, based on an information, the police party went near Ponpadi Tollgate and found that the petitioner along with four other accused were involved in joint possession of 1121 numbers of Tapentadol Tablets, 379 numbers of Nitrazepam Tablets and syringes; that upon investigation, they confessed that they purchased the tablets from Mumbai for the purpose of illegal sales to various college going students and general public, by misusing for intoxication, by diluting the crushed Tapentadol tablets in alcohol or water and injecting the solution using syringe needles. Hence, this case.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is in judicial custody since 11.10.2025; that 200 numbers of Tapentadol Tablets is alleged to have been recovered from the petitioner herein, which is not a commercial quantity; and that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and sought for bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are totally four accused involved in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A3; that the accused had illegally purchased the Tapentadol and Nitrazepam Tablets from Mumbai and selling the same to general public; that from A1, 40 nos. of Tapentadol Tablets and 379 numbers of Nitrazepam Tablets were recovered; that from A2, 300 nos. of Tapentadol Tablets were recovered; that from the petitioner, A4 and A5, each 200 nos. of Tapentadol Tablets were recovered; that the petitioner has no previous cases; and that the investigation of the case is pending.

I have considered the submissions made on both sides and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the seized contraband is not a narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances, the petitioner has no previous antecedents and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, 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 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 Court, Tiruttani and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their 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 their identity;

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

[c] 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];

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