M. Madhan v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. M.Madhan No.5, Dhanalakshmi Nagar 1st Street, Nerkundram,Chennai.

Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Kayar Police Station, Chegalpattu District. (Crime No.129 of 2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of apprehending of arrest in Crime No.129 of 2025 on Inspector of Police, Kayar Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

For Petitioner(s):

Muthamizh Selvakumar P For Respondent(s):

M/S.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 132, 123, 278 of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.129 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in the transportation and supply of 500 number of tapentadol tablets, which is not a scheduled drug under the NDPS Act, which were used for intoxication purpose by mixing them into saline water and injecting them into the body. It is further alleged that the same were also intended to be sold to students and other persons. Hence the complaint was lodged.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that only based on confession statement given by the co-accused the petitioner has been implicated in this case. Apart from that he is not having any role in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Therefore, he prays for grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Earlier, this Court vide order dated 19.12.2025 in Crl.O.P.No.34847 of 2025 dismissed the petitioner's anticipatory bail petition for the following reasons:

5. Considering the nature of the allegations and the fact that the petitioner is also having 6 previous cases, and huge quantity of the tablets was recovered and the source of the tablet is to be identified, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

3. Now, the present petition has been filed without any change in circumstances after the dismissal of the petitioner's earlier bail petition. This clearly shows that the petitioner has abused the process of law. Hence, I am not inclined to reconsider the earlier order.

4. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 10.02.2026 smn Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To

1. The Inspector of Police, Kayar Police Station, Chegalpattu District. (Crime No.129 of 2025) 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

smn CRL OP No. 2589 of 10.02.2026