Rajkumar Alias Appunu v. State Represented By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Rajkumar Alias Appunu S/o.Parasuraman, Pillaiyar Koil Street, Kailithangal Village, Kamakoorpalayam, Arani Taluk, Tiruvannamalai District.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State represented by:

The Inspector of Police Vadavanakkambadi Police Station, Vadavanakkambadi, Tiruvannamalai District.

Crime No.160/2025 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: The Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in Crime No.160 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, vadavanakkambadi Police Station, Vadavanakkambadi Tiruvannamalai District. For Petitioner(s):

M/s.G.Vinodhkumar For Respondent(s):

Mr. S. Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Criminal side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.11.2025 for the alleged offences under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and

29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 123 of B.N.S. in Cr. No.160 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.11.2025, it was found by the respondent police on secret information that the accused have illegally transported 33.082 kgs of Ganja and hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the occurrence took place on 07.11.2025 and the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.11.2025, that there are 10 accused and the petitioner herein has been arrayed as A9. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that though a commercial quantity of 33.082 kgs of Ganja has been recovered, no recovery has been made from this petitioner and he was implicated only based upon the confession statement and therefore, taking into consideration of the long incarceration of the petitioner, prayed to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

4. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police would strongly oppose the bail application on the ground that the petitioner is the person, who instructed A1 to A7 to purchase the Ganja and only upon his instruction, they have purchased the same and while trafficking, the accused were intercepted by the respondent police,

recovery of 33.082 kgs of Ganja was made. The learned Government Advocate would further submit that there is scientific evidence and there was money transaction into the account of the petitioner. Apart from that, the learned Government Advocate would also submit that the petitioner has 7 previous cases of similar nature and he is a drug developer.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. Therefore, taking into consideration of the totality of circumstances, upon the fact that the petitioner has 7 previous cases to his credit of similar nature and upon the further fact that the recovery of contraband is a commercial quantity and in order to overcome the rigors under Section 37 of NDPS Act, this Court could not find any material from the petitioner or from the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that this case is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 02-04-2026 MJS

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 Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

2. The Inspector of Police, Vadavanakkambadi Police Station, Vadavanakkambadi, Tiruvannamalai District.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MJS 02-04-2026