MUTHU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner/A2 who was arrested by the respondent police through Pt warrant on 1/11/2022 for the offences punishable under Ss. 8(c), 22(c), 29(1) of NDPS Act 1985 in Crime No.105 of 2022 seeks bail.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that on 11/6/2022 at about 13.10 hours, Tr.Boobalan, Sub Inspector of Police on receipt of secret information about illegal sale of drug tablet at Nagooran Thottam, entered the same in the General Diary and after obtaining permission, he along with his party went to the scene of occurrence. At that time, three unknown persons were standing with black color bag and on seeing the police, they tried to escape from that place. Immediately the police caught hold of two of them and yet another person escaped from that place and subsequently, during search, they found MDMA-ecstasy tablets-21 nos. weighing 10.15 grams from the accused Stephen @ Moony Thalai Stephen/A1. The said contra band were seized under seizure mahazar in the presence of witnesses. On enquiry with A1 they came to know that the person who had escaped from the scene of occurrence is the present petitioner herein. Based on the above a case was registered in N4 Fishing Harbour Police Station in Crime No.105 of 2022 under Ss. 8(c), 22(c), 29(1) of NDPS Act 1985

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner/A2 would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely roped in this case. He would submit that though there is a connection between A1 and A3 who are being the co-accused in several cases, the petitioner/A2 is not at all connected with A1 and A3. He would submit that based on the confession of the co-accused, the petitioner has been arrested and he has been in custody for the past four months. He would submit that the respondent after completion of investigation have filed the final report and even in the final report other than the statements recorded from A1 and A3 there is absolutely no material to connect the petitioner with the other accused and there is no recovery from the petitioner. He further submitted that this Court has already granted bail to the co-accused in Crl.O.P.No.5058 of 2023 vide order dtd. 29/3/2023. Hence he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.