Vijay v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Vijay S/o. Allimuthu, No.54, Ezhaipillaiyarkovil Street, Velipalayam, Nagapattinam - 611001.

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Velipalayam Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

Crime No.331/2025.

...Respondent/

Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.331 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner:

Mr.Gokulvisvas C R For Respondent:

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B) of the NDPS Act in Crime No.331 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has supplied 1.100 kg of ganja for the purpose of selling to the general public. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution case, and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submitted that the petitioner was not at all in the scene of occurrence. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and he is ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that two previous cases have been registered against the petitioner. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was not at all in the scene of the occurrence. However, while perusing the FIR, it discloses that he is the supplier of ganja. Therefore, as rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail; besides, he is also having two previous cases. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 09-04-2026 dk To

1. The Additional District Judge, EC Act, Thanjavur.

2. The Inspector of Police, Velipalayam Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

dk CRL OP No. 8930 of 2026 09-04-2026