CRL OP/34874/2019 of MOHAMED IRFAN Vs STATE REP BY, on 30 December 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

Monday, the Thirtieth day of December Two Thousand Nineteen PRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr Justice B.PUGALENDHICRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.34874 of 2019

MOHAMED IRFAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

Vs

STATE REP BY, [ RESPONDENT ]THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SOORAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, SALEM DISTRICT. CR.NO. 626 OF 2019.

For Petitioner : M/S. B.VASUDEVAN Advocate For Respondent : M/S.SARATHA DEVI V., GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE (Crl.Side)PETITION FOR BAIL 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused, who was arrested and remanded tojudicial custody on 24.10.2019 by the respondent police for anoffence under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b) (ii) (B) of NDPS Act 1985 inCrime No.626 of 2019 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that based on secretinformation, the respondent Police went to SOC (near Dalmia BoardTidal park on Omalur to Salem Main and found that the petitioner wasin possession of 1.25 Kgs of Ganja. He was arrested and remanded tojudicial custody and the contra band was also seized by therespondent police.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submittedthat a false case has been foisted against this petitioner and hehas nothing to do with the alleged offence. The learned counselfurther submitted that this petitioner was arrested and remanded tojudicial custody on 24.10.2019 and he has already sufferedincarceration for more than 67 days. However, to show his bonafide,the learned counsel for the petitioner volunteers that thepetitioner shall deposit a Non-refundable amount of Rs.20,000/- tothe District Head Quarters Hospital, Salem.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that thereis no previous bad antecedents against this petitioner.https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. Taking into consideration, the facts and circumstances of thecase and also of the fact that this petitioner has already sufferedincarceration for more than 67 days and there is no previous badantecedents against this petitioner, this Court is inclined to grantbail to this petitioner subject to the following conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bailon condition that he shall deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupeestwenty thousand only ) to the District Head Quarters Hospital, Salemand on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees tenthousand only) with two sureties each, for a like sum to thesatisfaction of the learned Special Judge, EC Act cases, (FAC) Salemand III Additional District Judge, Salem and on further conditionsthat:- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left ThumbImpression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copyof their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learnedMagistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action againstthe petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have beenimposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learnedMagistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble SupremeCourt in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can beregistered under Section 229A IPC.

TO

1 THE SPECIAL JUDGEEC ACT CASES, (FAC) SALEM AND III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, SALEM.

2 THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL JAIL, SALEM.

3 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTORHIGH COURT, MADRAS.4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SOORAMANGALAM POLICE STATION, SALEM DISTRICT.

5 THE DISTRICT HEAD QUARTERSHOSPITAL, SALEM

+1 CC to M/S. B.VASUDEVAN Advocate on payment of necessarycharges SR.No.26731

CRL OP.34874/2019 Date :30/12/2019cs 31/12/2019