Periyasamy Pandian Alias Pandi v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Periyasamy Pandian @ Pandi ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, V-1 Villivakkam Police Station, Chennai.

(Cr.No.664 of 2025) ..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 483 of BNSS to grant bail to the petitioner in Crime No.664 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner:

Mr.P.K.Shiva Nagesh For Respondent:

Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.02.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c), 22(b),20(b)(ii)(A) and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985 in Crime No.664 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with the other accused, was found in possession of 300 grams of ganja and 7.9 gram of Methamphetamine and the same had been seized by the respondent police. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no recovery from the petitioner and that he has been implicated in this case by way of a confession statement given by the other accused and that the co-accused was released on bail in Crl.MP.No.220 of 2026 dated 20.01.2026 & Crl.MP.No.373 of 2026 dated 29.01.2026 by the learned Principal Special Judge, Chennai. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 14.02.2026 and is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there was no recovery from the petitioner and that he has been implicated only based upon the confession statement of the co-accused and that the accused, those who have give confession, have already been released on bail and apart from that, the quantity of the contraband seized is only an intermediate quantity. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

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

available on record.

6. Considering the above facts, this Court is of the view that the quantity involved is an intermediate quantity and that the co-accused was also released on bail. Taking into consideration that the petitioner was arrayed as an accused based on the confession of the arrested accused and that the petitioner has no previous case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to the following conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 5.30 p.m. and 5.30 p.m, for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or

witness either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

11-03-2026 DRL Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. The XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police, V-1 Villivakkam Police Station, Chennai.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Chennai.

4. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

DRL 11-03-2026