Prashanth @ Nitrogen Prashanth v. State Of Tamil Nadu,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14-08-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN Prashanth @ Nitrogen Prashanth Petitioner(s) Vs State of Tamil Nadu, The Inspector of Police, T-7, Otteri Police Station.

Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the above Crime NO.497 of 2025 on the file of the respondent / police (i.e) The Inspector of Police, T-7, OTTERI Police station.

For Petitioner(s):

M/s.G.Suresh For Respondent(s):

Mr. L. Baskaran, Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.06.2025 for the offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B), 29(1) of NDPS, Act, 1985, in Crime No. 497 of 2025, on the file of respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The petition for bail for the alleged possession of 1Kg 350 g of Ganja by the petitioner along with two other accused. As per the prosecution, from this petitioner, 200grams of ganja was specifically recovered and from A1, 1Kg 150 grams of ganja was recovered, against A3, a knife was recovered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that it is a case foisted for the purpose of statistics and also states that in the same place of occurrence, two more FIRs were registered by the respondent police on previous occasions and in one case, the limb and the legs of the accused persons were broken by the respondent police. While so, it is highly improbable for a drug peddler to be in the same place. However, in the present F.I.R also the place of occurrence is same which creates a doubt about the case of the prosecution. That apart, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing was recovered from this

petitioner. However, the Respondent Police have falsely stated that 200 grams of ganja was recovered from this petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate(criminal side) to contradict the above said statement produced the mahazar of seizure of 200 grams of ganja from this petitioner in the presence of witnesses.

5. This Court, on perusing the records, finds that the respondent police due to clustering of peddlers in and around near Vandalur railway station, the respondent police has taken consistent measure to apprehend them and this petitioner is an History Sheeter "B" category in the register maintained by Kilambakkam Police Station is having nine criminal cases in various police stations. Considering the antecedent of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petitions stands dismissed. 14-08-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes nr

To

1. The learned Judicial Magistrate-II Chengalpattu 2.The Inspector of Police, T-7, Otteri Police Station.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras.

Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN J.

nr 14-08-2025