Alexander v. Union Of India
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.10.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Alexander ... Petitioner Vs.
Union of India, Represented by its Jr.Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal Unit, Chennai.
... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner/3rd accused on bail in C.C.No.91 of 2020 pending trial on the file of the Court of the learned I Additional Special Judge for NDPS and EC Act Cases, Chennai. For petitioner :
Mr.S.Kasirajan For Respondent :
Mr.N.P.Kumar, Special Public Prosecutor
O R D E R
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.02.2020, for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 22(c), 28 and 1/4
29 of the NDPS Act, pending trial in C.C.No.91 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the learned I Additional Special Judge for NDPS and EC Act Cases, Chennai in NCB.F.No.48/1/03/20-NCB/MDS, registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that, based on specific information, the officers of the Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai, seized 5 kgs of Methamphetamine on 13.02.2020 from the possession of fours persons, namely, Sivarupan, Alexander, Sujanthan, and Gopal, at Valasaravakkam, Chennai. The accused gave voluntary statements under Section 67 of the NDPS Act admitting their involvement, and were subsequently arrested and remanded to judicial custody. The chemical analysis confirmed the seized substances as Methamphetamine.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been in custody for the past 5 years and the trial has not yet been concluded. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the trial proceedings. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail. 2/4
4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner is ranked as A2 and the trial is at the stage of arguments. He further submitted that the examination of witnesses has been completed, arguments have been advanced, and the matter is now pending for filing of written arguments by the parties, after which judgment will be pronounced. It was further submitted that the accused has delayed the proceedings by taking nearly two years to cross-examine PW8. Hence, there was considerable delay in the trial.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the fact that the trial has reached the final stage and is pending only for filing of written arguments, there is every likelihood of the trial being completed shortly. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail at this stage.
7. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 27.10.2025 cda 3/4
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
cda To 1.The Jr.Intelligence Officer, Union of India, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal Unit, Chennai.
2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
27.10.2025 4/4