Sundharapandiyan v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Sundharapandiyan ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. by The Inspector of Police Gummudipoondi Police Station, Tiruvallur District (Crime No.284 of 2025) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.284 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.Devaraj Mahesh For Respondent(s):
Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar Government Advocate (Criminal side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.12.2025 for the alleged offences under Sections 8 (c), 22 (C) and 29 (1) of the NDPS Act, 1985, in Crime No.284 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused was found in illegal possession of 56g of Methamphetamine, 25.5 grams of MDMA Tablets and 0.37 grams of LSD Stamps. Hence the case.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been in custody since 14.12.2025. He further submitted that there are seven accused persons in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A5. He specifically stated that there was no recovery effected from the petitioner. Hence, he prays for the grant of bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that a total quantity of 56 grams of Methamphetamine was recovered from the A1 (Santhosh), 4grams of MDMA tablets from A2 (Natarajan) and 21.5 grams of MDMA tablets and 0.7 grams of LSD Stamps from A6 (Fayas). He further submitted that there is strong evidence to demonstrate that the petitioner transferred an amount of Rs.9200/- to the A1's account on 05.12.2025 and was involved in the possession of the contraband.
He strongly opposed the bail application on the ground that, since a commercial quantity is involved, the rigour under Section 37 of the NDPS Act would be attracted. 5.At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the charge sheet has been filed and taken on file in C.C.No.800 of 2026 on 16.06.2026 by the Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Chennai.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
7.Although the charge sheet has been filed, this case involves the recovery of a commercial quantity of contraband. While there was no direct recovery from the petitioner, the prosecution relies upon the transfer of Rs.9200/- to the account of the first accused. It is also the case of the prosecution that at the time the commercial quantity of contraband was recovered from A1, the petitioner was in the company of A1. 8.Despite the lack of direct recovery from the petitioner and the subsequent filing of the charge sheet, the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side), reveal that the total contraband recovered falls within the definition of a commercial quantity. Furthermore, evidence shows a clear money trial between A1 and the petitioner. Therefore, the recovery made from the co-accused must also be placed against the petitioner.
9.Under these circumstances, the petitioner has failed to putforth any grounds to overcome the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Hence, this is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed.
18-06-2026 ep
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
EP To 1.The Inspector of Police Gummudipoondi Police Station, Tiruvallur District 2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.
18-06-2026