Crl.M.P.(MD)No.4351 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.04.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI Crl.M.P.(MD)No.4351 of 2025 in Crl.A.(MD)No.963 of 2024 Ramakrishnan, S/o.Thangavel Nadar, Keeraithottam Street, Puthiyamputhur, Thoothukudi District. Petitioner(s) versus The Inspector of Police, Thoothukudi NIB CID Thoothukudi District. Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Vinoth Bharathi Advocate For Respondent(s): Mr.A.S.Abul Kalam Azad Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ORDER The petitioner is the 4th accused in C.C.No.16 of 2018 on the file of the learned Additional District Judge, Principal Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai. After the trial, the trial Court, by its Judgment dated 04.10.2024, found the 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.(MD)No.4351 of 2025 petitioner guilty for the offence under Section 8(c) r/w. 22(c), 25, 29(1) of the NDPS Act and convicted and sentenced him to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- in default, to undergo six months simple imprisonment. Challenging the Judgment of conviction and sentence, the petitioner has preferred an appeal in Crl.A.(MD)No.963 of 2024 and the same has been admitted by this Court on 12.11.2024. The petitioner has also moved this petition seeking suspension of sentence imposed by the trial Court. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the co-accused, namely, A5 and A6 have filed petitions to suspend the sentence imposed by the trial Court, before this Court, in Crl.M.P.(MD)No.12228 of 2024 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.2068 of 2025 respectively, which have been entertained by this Court and granted suspension of sentence, by order dated 12.02.2025 and 07.03.2025 respectively. 3. The learned counsel further submits that there was a material correction in the arrest memo as to the nature of contraband, which was recovered from the accused. Originally, the contraband was mentioned in the arrest memo as 'ganja' and thereafter, it was struck off and written as 'ketamine'. The learned counsel, by relying on the evidence of the Investigating Officer, submits that the Investigating Officer has 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.(MD)No.4351 of 2025 also admitted the corrections made in the arrest memo. 4. The learned counsel, by referring the recovery mahazar, submits that Crime No.85 of 2016 is mentioned in the recovery mahazar, which was recorded at the place of occurrence, at about 3.20 p.m. on 09.11.2016. But, according to the prosecution case, the case was registered at 7.00 p.m. on 09.11.2016. Therefore, according to him, the entire case has been created in the police station. 5. The learned counsel, by referring the order of this Court passed in Crl.M.P. (MD)No.2068 of 2025 filed by the 6th accused, submits that this Court has also considered the said point to grant suspension of sentence to 6th accused. Therefore, the petitioner shall also be considered for suspension of sentence. 6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) has raised objection that the petitioner was found in possession of 500 grams of ketamine and therefore, he was arrested along with the contraband. The learned Government Advocate has also disputed the corrections made in the arrest memo. 7. This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the materials placed on record. 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.(MD)No.4351 of 2025 8. The petitioner was found in possession of 500 grams of ketamine on 09.11.2016 along with other accused. As per the case of the prosecution, the respondent Police have recovered 2 kgs. of ketamine from the accused Nos.1 to 4, each having 500 grams. The 5th accused was arrested as if he escorted the Car, in which, the contraband was transported. The investigating agency has failed to collect any material connecting the nexus between the 5th accused and other accused. Therefore, this Court granted suspension of sentence to the 5th accused, by order dated 12.02.2025, in Crl.M.P.(MD)No.12228 of 2024. 9. The 6th accused was arrested as he is the owner of the Car in which the contraband was transported. However, the RC book stands in the name of another person and it was also transferred after the registration of this case. Further, the investigating agency has failed to collect any material connecting the other accused with the car and there was no recovery from the 6th accused. Therefore, considering the said facts, this Court granted suspension of sentence to the 6th accused, by order dated 07.03.2025 in Crl.M.P.(MD)No.2068 of 2025. However, the case of the petitioner cannot be equated as that of the 5th accused and 6th accused. Further, the recovery was made from this petitioner also. In the event, if any corrections made in 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.(MD)No.4351 of 2025 the arrest with regard to the nature of the contraband, it cannot be taken as a ground to grant suspension of sentence. All the points raised by the petitioner can be appreciated only at the time of final hearing. 10. Considering the nature of offence and also considering the commercial quantity of ketamine, this Court is not inclined to grant suspension of sentence to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous petition is dismissed. sd/- 01/04/2025 / TRUE COPY / /04/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III / IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. OGY TO 1 THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, PRINCIPAL SPECIAL COURT FOR EC AND NDPS ACT CASES, MADURAI. 2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THOOTHUKUDI NIB CID, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT. 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, PALAYAMKOTTAI. 4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.(MD)No.4351 of 2025 ORDER IN CRL MP(MD) No.4351 of 2025 in Crl.A.(MD)No.963 of 2024 Date :01/04/2025 SS/SAR- /24/04/2025/ 6P/5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis