Madras High Court
Kanthasami vs State Represented By on 10 November, 2022
CRL OP(MD) No.13750 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
(Criminal Jurisdiction)
Date : 10/11/2022
PRESENT
The Hon`ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI
CRL OP(MD) No.13750 of 2022
Kanthasami ... Petitioner/Accused 3
Vs
State represented by
Inspector of Police,
Manur P.S,
Tirunelveli District,
Crime No.367 of 2020] ...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioner : Mr.Manimaran.NA
For Respondent : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar,
Additional Public Prosecutor
PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.439 of Cr.P.C.
PRAYER :-
For bail in Crime No.367 of 2020 on the file of
the Respondent police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :-
The petitioner is the third accused in
Crime No.367 of 2020 and he was arrested and remanded
to judicial custody on 30.07.2020.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP(MD) No.13750 of 2022
2.The case of the prosecution is that on
29.07.2020 at about 8.00 hours, based on a secret
information, the respondent police has intercepted an
auto rickshaw bearing registration No.TN 72 AR 0201,
wherein, they found accused Nos.1 and 2 were in
possession of 14 Kgs of ganja and recovered the same.
Based on the confession statement of accused,
the police have recovered 8 Kgs of ganja from the
petitioner and arrested the petitioner.
3.The learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly
submits that this is the sixth bail application.
The earlier bail applications filed by the petitioner
were dismissed by this Court considering the quantity
of contraband involved in this case.
He further submits that mandatory provisions under
Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act, have not been
followed and the petitioner is not having any bad
antecedent and therefore, by considering the period
of incarceration, the bail application of the
petitioner can be considered.
2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP(MD) No.13750 of 2022
4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor
submits that the total quantity of the contraband
involved in this case is 22 kgs of ganja, which is a
commercial quantity. The petitioner / accused has
purchased 22 kgs of ganja from Vizhag, Andhrapradesh
and transported the same to Thoothukudi.
The petitioner handed over 14 kgs of ganja to A1 and
A2 to transport to Thuthimalli area. While they were
transporting the contraband in an auto, it was
intercepted and 14kgs of ganja were recovered and
based on their confession statement, the remaining
quantity of ganja was recovered from this petitioner.
5.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
also referred to the provisions under
Sections 35 and 37 of the NDPS Act and submits that
as per Section 35 of the NDPS Act, the presumption
can be drawn as against this petitioner that culpable
mental state includes intention, motive, knowledge of
a fact and belief in or reason to belief a fact.
Whether the petitioner purchased the contraband from
Vizhag, Andrapradesh and handed over 14Kgs of the
3/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP(MD) No.13750 of 2022
contraband to A1 and A2, can be proved before the
trial Court, further there is no change in
circumstance and therefore, the petitioner is not
entitled for bail. He also relied on the judgment of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in Prasanta Kumar Sarkar Vs
Ashis Chatterjee and another reported in
(2010) 14 SCC P 496 and State of Madhya Pradesh Vs
Kajad, reported in 2001(7) SCC 673.
6.This Court considered the rival submissions
and perused the materials placed on record.
7.The petitioner was arrested on 29.07.2020
pursuant to the confession statement of A1 and A2 and
8 kgs ganja was recovered from him. Though the
recovered quantity is only 8 Kgs of ganja,
the respondent police have taken a stand that this
petitioner is the main accused and he purchased 22
kgs of ganja from Vizhag and handed over 14 Kgs of
ganja to A1 and A2. The available materials shows
that 14 Kgs of ganja was recovered from A1 and A2
4/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP(MD) No.13750 of 2022
form an auto and another 8 Kgs of ganja was recovered
from this petitioner, pursuant to the confession of
A1 and A2. Therefore, at this stage this Court is not
inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, in view
provisions under Section 35 and 37 of the NDPS Act.
Further the mandatory violations if any, as alleged
by the petitioner, shall be looked into during the
trial.
8.The petitioner is in jail from 30.07.2020.
Considering the period of incarceration, the trial
Court shall endeavor to conclude the trial as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period
of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.
9.Accordingly, this criminal original petition
stands dismissed.
(B P J)
10.11.2022
dsk
5/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP(MD) No.13750 of 2022
To
1.The Principal Special Court for EC &
NDPS Act Cases,
Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Manur P.S,
Tirunelveli District,
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
6/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP(MD) No.13750 of 2022
B.PUGALENDHI,J
DSK
ORDER
IN
CRL OP(MD) No.13750 of 2022
Date : 10.11.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
