Selvam vs State Of Tamilnadu

P. Dhanabal, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w. 20(b)(ii)(c), and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985, in Crime No.140 of 2025, on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that on 09.06.2025 at 05.10 hours, the Sub Inspector of Police, based on secret information, along with a police party and equipment, conducted a surveillance near the tree behind Saint Mary's School on Kamagauntanpatti Road, Cumbam. At that time four persons including the petitioner were intercepted and found that they are in possession of 22 kgs. 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. It is alleged that the petitioner was in separate possession of 6 kgs of ganja only. He would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.06.2025. Co-accused in this case were already released on bail. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner and other accused were found in illegal possession of 22kgs of ganja, which is a commercial quantity. He would further submit that the petitioner has previous cases. Considering the nature of grave offence, he strongly opposed to grant 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, nature of offence, and though as per prosecution, the quantity of contraband involved in this case is a commercial quantity, the contraband were recovered through separate mahazar from different persons in a public place and the same has been clubbed together and treated as commercial quantity. As far as this petitioner is concerned, the alleged contraband recovered from him is 6 kgs and the same is not a commercial quantity. Considering further that the petitioner has been granted bail in the previous cases registered against him as well as 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, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and 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 Sessions Judge, Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Phychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Phychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he 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 him 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.