BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Tuesday, the Twenty Ninth day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.14411 of 2011 PREMKUMAR, ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, USILAMPATTI TALUK POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.199/2011) ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. C.VAKEESWARARAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.S.DURAI PANDIAN, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner is arrayed as A1 and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.09.2011 for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 8C r/w. 21(C) & 8C r/w.20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.199 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail. 2. Heard Mr.C.Vakeeswaran, Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.S.Durai Pandian, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Criminal side) appearing for the State. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the petitioner is ranked as A1 and the alleged contraband to the extend of 900 gms of brown sugar was said to have been seized from him on 23.09.2011, but it was not produced before the Court concerned within time, and it was produced only on 14.11.2011 and the said delay in producing the said contraband creates a serious doubt against the petitioner and the petitioner is entitled for grant of regular bail. He would also submit that the co-accused/A7 was found in possession of 2 Kgs of ganja and he was granted bail before the Court below. He would further submit in his argument that the petitioner is inside for more than 68 days and therefore, he may by considered for bail. 4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor (Criminal side) would submit that in his argument that the 900 gms of brown sugar has been seized only from the petitioner and out of the said contraband seized 900gms, 50gms has been taken away for sending the same for chemical analysis and the remaining 850gms have been taken for the purpose of producing before the Court. He would further submit in his argument that there is yet another 1.950kgs of ganja has been seized from the petitioner on that day. In support of his argument he has also produced https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ seizure mahazar for the perusal of the Court. He would further submit that the investigation is still pending and it is a serious offence and the plea of the petitioner for the grant of bail may not be considered at this stage. 5. Considering the submission made on both sides, I could see that the petitioner was said to have possessed 900gms of brown sugar and 1.950kgs of ganja and the same was seized by the Sub-Inspector of Police Special team on 23.09.2011, Madha Kovil at Andipatti Kanavai Gate. On perusal of the seizure mahazer, I could see that the said contraband was seized on 23.09.2011 similarly confession statement has been obtained and it has also been produced. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said contraband has not been produced into the Court immediately but it was produced only on 14.11.2011 and therefore, there is a serious doubt about the filing of the case against the petitioner. He would also state that there is no previous case for the petitioner and his contention is to release the petitioner on bail, since he would not be found guilty. 6. The said argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner can be considered only at the time of trial and not at the stage of investigation. Admittedly, the investigation is still pending and if for any reason, the petitioner is released on bail, there is a possibility of absconding or tampering of witnesses during the investigation and therefore this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. sd/- 29/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) TO 1. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, USILAMPATTI TALUK POLICE STATION, MADURAI DISTRICT. 2. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. C.VAKEESWARARAN Advocate SR.No.41882 SR : 30.11.2011 : 2P/5C ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14411 of 2011 Date :29/11/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/