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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02-07-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Saran S/o Sankar, No.1/373, Avvai Nagar, 1st Street, Near EB Office, Paruvathanahalli, Noolahalli, Dharmapuri.

..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police J1, Saidapet Police Station, Chennai - 600 015.

Crime No.527 of 2025.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.527 of 2025 on the file of Inspector of Police, J1 Saidapet Police Station, Chennai.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.P.Kumaresan, Senior Counsel for Mr.M.R.Jothimanian For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar, Govt.Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.04.2025 for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(A), 22(C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act in Crime No. 527 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on the secret information, on 30.12.2025, the respondent police conducted vehicle check up and found the petitioner along with other accused was in possession of 50 grams of ganja, 4.27 grams of MDMA tablets, 0.53 grams of LSD stamp and 14.33 grams of Ash Malana Cream. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that there are about four accused and the petitioner is arrayed as A3. He further submitted that the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody since 06.04.2025 in connection with the FIR registered on 30.12.2025. He further submitted that the petitioner is a Doctor preparing for Neet-PG examination, and he has been falsely implicated only based on the confession of A1 and A2 and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the arrested accused A1 and A2 have already been released on statutory bail in Crl.MP.Nos.3330 & 3329 of 2026 dated 30.06.2026 by the learned Principal Special Court under EC & NDPS Act, Chennai. He further submitted that there are no materials connecting the petitioner with the recovery of the commercial quantity and nothing was recovered from him except the mobile phone. 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

submitted that there are substantial evidence to show that the petitioner had received money from A1 and A2. In support of the same, he relied upon the screenshots of WhatsApp messages and the CDR analysis chart, which, according to him, disclose the transfer of money to A1 and A2. 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. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case; taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side); though allegations were made against the petitioner, a perusal of the FIR shows that the petitioner has been implicated only on the basis of the confession of the coaccused and no recovery has been effected from him and that the co-accused/ A1 & A2 have already been enlarged on statutory bail. Hence, considering the petitioner's incarceration since 06.04.2025, and upon the fact that there is no recovery from the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain 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

Metropolitan Magistrate No.IX, Saidapet, Chennai District 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 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [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.

02-07-2026 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 Metropolitan Magistrate No.IX, Saidapet, Chennai District.

2. The Inspector of Police J1, Saidapet Police Station, Chennai.

3.The Superintendent, Puzhal Jail, Chennai.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 02-07-2026