Latha v. State Rep by the Inspector of Police

O R D E R This petitioner is apprehending arrest in Crime No.398 of 2025 registered on 27.07.2025 for the offence under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(A), 29(1) of NDPS Act and Section 132 of BNS Act, on the file of the respondent police.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that 400 grams of ganja were seized from two accused persons. Based on the confession statement given by one of the accused, Shankar, this petitioner is suspected to be the supplier of the ganja.

¶3The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that they have not conducted a search of the petitioner's premises so far. However, there are four previous cases of a similar in nature against the petitioner.

¶4This Court is of the view that the respondent police, even after receiving information by way of confession about the role of the petitioner herein in the crime, have neither taken any steps to secure her nor conducted a search of the petitioner's premises, which only indicates that she has been roped in this case for some other purposes. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail subject to certain conditions:

¶5Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, on or before 28.08.2025 before the learned X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition that: [a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the said Magistrate on or before 28.08.2025, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled; [b] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, as and when required for interrogation; [d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283]; [e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

19.08.2025 drl To

1.The X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

2.The Inspector of Police, P-6, Kodungaiyur Police Station, Chennai.

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN,

J. drl

19.08.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 19.08.2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Latha ... Petitioner Vs. The State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police, P-6, Kodungaiyur Police Station, Chennai. Crime No.398 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of apprehending arrest in Crime No.398 of 2025 on the file of respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.Elumalai Arumugam For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Criminal Side)