Vicky @ Vignesh v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Vicky @ Vignesh ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Maduranthakam Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

Cr.No.407 of 2025.

..Respondent(s) Prayer: This criminal original petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to grant anticipatory bail to the above petitioner/accused in Crime No.407 of 2025 on the file and pending investigation before the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

Ms.Manjula M For Respondent(s):

Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B), 25, 29(1) and 25(1A) of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short 'the Act') in Crime No.407 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner and other accused were involved in illegal transportation of ganja containing 2.90 Kgs,

through the car belonging to them. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and that he was not present at the scene of occurrence. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the Ganja recovered is 2.90 Kgs and that there are 16 previous cases registered against the petitioner and among them three cases are of similar in nature. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the present criminal original petition.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. From the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the quantity of ganja recovered is 2.90 kgs and that the petitioner has got 16 previous cases registered against him. The nature of the offence alleged is grave and his action has a serious impact on society at large. Hence, granting anticipatory bail in cases involving narcotic substances, particularly when there are 16 previous cases registered against the petitioner,

may send a wrong message to society at large.

7. In view of the above, this Court does not find any merit in the present anticipatory bail application. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed.

12-03-2026 rap To

1. The Judicial Magistrate Court No-1, Maduranthakam.

2. The Inspector of Police, Maduranthakam Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

rap 12-03-2026