Jana v. State Rep By It Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Jana ..Petitioner Vs State rep by The Inspector of Police, B-7, Vellavedu Police Station, Avadi District.

Crime No. 95 of 2025.

..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 483 of BNS Act to enlarge the petitioner herein on bail in Cr.No.95 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Vellavedu Police Station, Avadi District / Respondent herein.

For Petitioner:

Mr.T.Shanmugam For Respondent:

Mr. Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 20.03.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 8(c) r/w 22(c), 25 of NDPS Act in Crime No.95 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petition was found in possession

of 400 tablets of Tramadol Hydro Chloride and Acetaminphen weighing around 268 grams. Hence, this case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been incarcerated since 20.03.2025. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and strongly opposed the bail application on the ground that the petitioner has 11 previous cases and out of which, two NDPS Acts are pending. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record.

6. From the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and taking into consideration, the submissions of the learned Govt Advocate (Crl.Side), this Court is of a firm view that the petitioner is misusing the liberty granted by the Court and involved in yet another NDPS case and the quantity recovered from the petitioner is a commercial quantity. From the submissions

of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well in the petition, this Court could not find any material to overcome the rigour of section 37(1)(ii)(b) of NDPS Act and could not find any merits in the bail application. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

24-03-2026 SHL

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Poonamallee

2. The Inspector of Police, B-7, Vellavedu Police Station, Avadi District

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

SHL 24-03-2026