Dinesh v. The State Rep By, Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.10.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.Nos.17362 & 21955 of 2025 Crl.O.P.No.17362 of 2025:
Dinesh ... Petitioner Vs.
State Represented by Station House Officer, Thiruvennainallur Police Station ... Respondent (Cr.No.238 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.238 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, pending investigation. For Petitioner :
Mr.S.Natarajan For Respondent :
Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Crl.O.P.No.21955 of 2025:
1.Nagaraj 2.Madhan ... Petitioners Vs.
State rep by The Station House Officer, Thiruvennainallur Police Station, Villupuram District.
... Respondent (Cr.No.238 of 2025) 1/6
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Cr.No.238 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, pending investigation. For Petitioners :
Mr.A.Murugavel For Respondent :
Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side) COMMON ORDER The petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.17362 of 2025, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.05.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(c), 29(1), 25, 27-A of NDPS Act in Crime No.238 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.21955 of 2025, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 31.05.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1), 25, 27(A) of NDPS Act in Crime No.238 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.
3. The case of prosecution is that based on secret information the respondent police along with team went to the place of occurrence and on suspicion stopped one Auto and enquired the persons, during enquiry, they came to know that the accused namely A1/Ganesan and A2/Dhanam and were 2/6
found in possession of 4kgs of ganja and the same was seized under seizure mahazar in the presence of witnesses and obtained their confession statements, in which, it revealed that A6/Karthik bought 80kgs of ganja through A8/Nagaraj and sell the same along with A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A7 and A9 for their personal gain. Based on the confession statement of A1 & A2 arrested A3 to A5 and also seized 6kgs of ganja from them. Then, arrested A6/Karthik and seized 66kgs of ganja and based on the confession statement of A6, arrested A7/Seenuvasan and seized 4kgs of ganja and seized under Seizure Mahazar in the presence of witnesses. Hence the case.
4. The petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.17362/2025 namely Dinesh/A5 is concerned, 2kgs of ganja was recovered and the petitioners in Crl.O.P.No.21955/2025 namely Nagaraj/A8 and Madhan/A9 are concerned recovery of 80kgs of ganja from them and they involved in conspiracy and based on their conspiracy all these persons have involved in selling of ganja to public.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner/A5 in Crl.O.P.No.17362/2025 submitted that the petitioner is in custody for very long period and recovery effected from this petitioner is only 2 kgs of ganja which is not Commercial 3/6
quantity and the petitioner is having no previous cases. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners/A8 & A9 in Crl.O.P.No.21955/2025 submitted that no recovery was effected from them and though it is stated that the petitioners are workers involved in trafficking the contraband, there is no material evidence available on record to support their case. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and reported that there are totally nine accused in this case and that the petitioners herein are ranked as A5, A8 & A9. Originally A1 and A2 were arrested with 4 kgs of ganja and after their arrest in this case leads to arrest series of accused and it further revealed that they were belongs to one gang and A8 and A9 are the main persons involved in smuggling and accordingly they all were arrested. He further submitted that they were also having bad antecedents and involved in similar offences. He further submitted that investigation in this case is not concluded and if the petitioners are allowed to go out on bail they will involve in similar offence. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioners. 4/6
8. I have also considered FIR and perused the records available.
9. Though the prosecution case reveals that 4 kgs of ganja were recovered from the arrested accused A1 and A2, it has further come to light that a total of 80 kgs of ganja were brought by A6, A8, and A9, who, along with others, were part of a gang engaged in such illegal activities. The prosecution has also pointed out the bad antecedents of the petitioners, and the statements recorded from the arrested accused indicate that each of them aware of the roles played by others and the movement of contraband from one place to another. Since the investigation is still in progress, this Court is of the view that granting bail to the petitioners at this stage may lead to their further involvement in similar offences. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners at this stage.
10. Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are dismissed. 14.10.2025 ssi 5/6
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
ssi To:
1.The The Station House Officer, Thiruvennainallur Police Station, Villupuram District.
2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
Crl.O.P.Nos.17362 & 21955 of 2025 14.10.2025 6/6