BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Fourth day of November Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH CRL OP(MD) No.15345 of 2011 A.NAGAPPAN ... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED Vs THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NIBCID, DINDIGUL, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. CR.NO.197 OF 2011 ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT) FOR PETITIONER : M/S.R.C.PAUL KANAGARAJ ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT : MR.K.S.DURAIPANDIAN ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR PETITION FOR BAIL UNDER SEC. 439 CR.P.C. ORDER : THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER :- The petitioner is the sole accused and they were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.111.2011 for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 8(C) r/w 20(b)(11)(B) of the NDPS Act in Crime No.197 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police and hence, seeks bail. 2.Heard Mr.R.C.Paul Kanagaraj, 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 an innocent person and he has no previous case. He would further submit in his argument that the learned Special Judge for E.C and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai has referred to in his order that the petitioner has got a previous case in Battalakundu P.S.Cr.No.332 of 2010. It is obviously a mistake and the said case is not relevant to the petitioner and he is in judicial custody for more than 15 days. He would further submit in his argument that the petitioner's mother is taking treatment in Stanely Medical College Hospital and on humanitarian grounds, he may be granted bail and he is ready to abide was wait to condition likely to be imposed upon him by this Court. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) would submit in his argument that as far as this petitioner is concerned there is no previous case and the possession of ganja with the petitioner was below the commercial quantity and if for any reason, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner, stringent condition may be imposed. 5.Considering the submission made on both sides, I could see that the previous case is referred to by the learned Special Judge, Dindigul in Battalakundu P.S.Cr.No.332 of 2010 was only with reference to another accused viz., Selvam and this petitioner is not involved in the said https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ case. Moreover, it is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner's mother is taking treatment in Stanely Medical College Hospital, he is to look after her. In the said circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner with stringent condition. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on executing a separate 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 Principal Special Judge for E.C. And NDPS Act, Madurai and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the NIBCID Chennai, daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders and also to appear before the respondent police as and when required to co-operate with the investigation. sd/- 24/11/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE PRINCIPAL SPECIAL JUDGE FOR E.C. AND NDPS ACT, MADURAI. 2 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, NIBCID, CHENNAI. 3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NIBCID, DINDIGUL, DINDIGUL DISTRICT. 4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC TO M/S.R.C.PAUL KANAGARAJ, ADVOCATE SR.NO.41311. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.15345 of 2011 Date :24/11/2011 2P/6C RPB : 25.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/