Elango @ Dulasidas vs State Of Tamil Nadu

P. Dhanabal, J

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.10.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C) r/w. 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.442 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that on secret information the respondent police went to the scene of occurrence and found that the accused persons are in possession of 22 kilograms of ganja. Hence, the case.

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. Based on confession statement of the co-accused, this petitioner has been implicated in this case and no recovery has been made from this petitioner. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. Totally there are 17 accused in this case. On the basis of the confession statement made by the A1, this petitioner has been implicated in this case. The recovery was made from the A1. Totally 22 kgs. of Ganja has been transported. Out of which 5 kgs. were sold by the accused themselves. The petitioner has one previous case under IPC offence. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, though it is stated that the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity, it is also stated that out of 22 kgs. of Ganja 5 Kgs. of Ganja were sold by the accused persons themselves, hence, the quantity involved in this case is not commercial quantity, the petitioner has no previous case for the similar kind of offence, though the petitioner has one previous case under IPC, in that case he was granted bail, and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

[a] 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 for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur, at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, until further orders:

[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 5560].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.