Ajith v. State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Ajith ..Petitioner Vs State rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Neyveli Township Police Station, Cuddalore district.

Cr.No.18 of 2026.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.18/2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner:

M/S. G.Saravanabhavan For Respondent:

Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Govt.Advocate (Crl Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.01.2026 for the alleged offence under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act in Crime No.18 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent police have seized

21.200 kgs of ganja from A1. Hence, this case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has been remanded under judicial custody since 24.01.2026 and that the total recovery even according to the prosecution was 21.200 kgs of ganja from A1. There is no recovery from this petitioner. Only based on the confession statement of the A1, this petitioner has been implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. 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. At this juncture, the learned Govt Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that investigation is pending and that this petitioner was arrested when the accused were converting the ganja into small quantity. Therefore, there is no recovery from the petitioner. Since he was dealt with commercial quantity of 21.200 kgs of ganja, the rigour under section 37 of NDPS Act is attracted. He further submitted that there are three previous cases pending against the petitioner, out of which, one is a murder case. 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, the main contention put forth by the learned Govt Advocate (Crl.Side) is that investigation is at preliminary stage and apart from that though the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no recovery from this petitioner, the contention of the learned Govt Advocate (Crl.Side) that he has dealt with commercial quantity of ganja by converting into small quantity, therefore it attracts the rigour under section 37 of NDPS Act. Apart from that, the petitioner has also got three previous cases, out of which one is murder case. Hence, considering the totality of the circumstances, this Court is of the firm view that it is not appropriate to consider the bail of the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 10-04-2026 SHL

1. The Inspector of Police, Neyveli Township Police Station, Cuddalore district.

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

SHL 10-04-2026