Velazhagi v. The State Rep By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.3526 of 2026 Velazhagi W/o Manivannan ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police P-1 Pullianthope Police Station, Chennai District ( Crime No.07 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.07 of 2026 on the file of the respondent and pass orders. For Petitioner : Mr.T. I. Ramanathan For Respondent : Mr.A. Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 08.01.2026 for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) r/w Sections 20(b) (ii)(A) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychtropic Substances Act,1985 and Section 123 of BNSS Act, 2023 Section 77 of Juvenile Justice ( Care and protection of Children) Act, 2015 and Section 24(1) of Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Acts, 2003 in Crime No.07 of 2026 registered on the file of respondent police seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused were in possession of 440 grams of Ganja, 50 grams of maava and 100 grams of hans and they were trying to sell the same to the general public. Hence the case was registered against the petitioner and other accused and they were remanded to judicial custody on 08.01.2026. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that only based on the confession statement given by the co-accused and the petitioner is having some previous cases he was added as an accused in this case. He also submitted that however the quantity involved in this case is very low and the said contraband is used for his personal consumption. He further submitted that Lower Court has granted bail in Crl.M.P.No.577 of 2026 on 19.01.2026 to two co-accused in this case. Hence, prays to extend the same benefit to the petitioner and grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender and there are totally 56 previous cases out of which 37 are NDPS cases. He further submitted that

in this case the quantity involved is 600 grams of banned contraband, but in all other cases the petitioner has dealt with huge quantity. Hence he cannot seek to extend the benefit of the order passed by the Court below in Crl.M.P.No.577 of 2026 on 19.01.2026 to the petitioner and opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. I have gone through the F.IR and other records, which reveals that that there are totally 56 previous cases pending against the petitioner out of which 37 are NDPS cases. Hence, the contention of the petitioner that the petitioner was only in possession of 600 grams of banned contraband and the same is used for his personal consumption cannot be accepted and the same is not a ground for granting bail.

6. Considering the facts of the case and the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender and the previous antecedents of the petitioner, if the petitioner is released on bail he will indulge in similar type of offence in future. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 24.02.2026 smn

To

1. The Sub Inspector of Police P-1 Pullianthope Police Station, Chennai District 2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

smn Crl.O.P.No.3526 of 2026 24.02.2026