SATHYA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 2/4/2023 for the offence punishable under Ss. 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(c), 25 and 29(1) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in Crime No.95 of 2023, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks bail.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that on 2/4/2023, on receipt of the secret information about illegal sale of narcotic substances, respondent police went to the nearby Royapuram GM Pettai Road, near Rajagopal School, where they found four unknown persons/accused were standing near the Swift Car bearing registration No.TN-11-AW-1545 and on seeing the respondent, they attempted to escape and the respondent had caught hold of them. During search, the respondent found that the accused were in illegal possession of 36 kilograms of Ganja, which is a commercial quantity. Hence the case.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is arrayed as A3 in this case and he is an innocent person, aged about 30 years and he has been falsely implicated in this case, since he happens to be the friend of one Karthik, who has been arrayed as A2. He further submitted that on 2/4/2023, when the petitioner along with some other friends were standing near the Swift Car bearing registration No.TN-11-AW-1545 belonging to the mother of A2, the respondent police has arrested A2, the petitioner herein and other friends. He also submitted that the contraband was recovered only from A1 and even as per prosecution, the contraband was stated to be recovered from A1 and A2-Karthik and they have confessed that along with other accused they had purchased the alleged contraband from Andhra Pradesh with an intention to sell the same to others in Chennai. Other than the allegation the petitioner and other friends were standing near the car, no other material to connect the petitioner and that even as per the prosecution, the contraband alleged is said to be recovered only from A1, and there is no recovery from the present petitioner and he had no previous case against him. He also submitted that one Vinodh/A4, who is also arrested on 2/4/2023 along with the petitioner was granted bail in Crl.O.P.No.11508 of 2023 on 8/6/2023. He further reiterated that the the petitioner has been arrested only because he happens to be the friend of A1 and A2 and he is in custody from 2/4/2023 and the period of incarceration would be taken into consideration, hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.