Mohammed Siddiq Rahman v. State Rep.By. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Mohammed Siddiq Rahman ..Petitioner Vs State Rep.by.

The Inspector of Police North Plice Station, Tiruppur.

(Crime No.285 of 2026) ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in Crime No. 285 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, North Police Station, Tiruppur.

For Petitioner:

Mr.P.Thinesh For Respondent:

Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 08.04.2026 for the alleged offence under Section 123 of BNS in Crime No.285 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner alleged to have possessed narcotic pills in order to sell it to public and the same was seized by the respondent police. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He submitted that based on the confession of A1, this petitioner has been implicated in this case. 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 submitted that the petitioner is having five previous cases pending against him. 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) and the totality of the circumstances, it is seen that the petitioner is having five previous cases pending against him, hence, this Court is of the firm view that it is not appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 05-06-2026 SHL To:

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruppur

2. The Inspector of Police North Plice Station, Tiruppur.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

SHL 05-06-2026