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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.30945 of 2025 Vinayagam ... Petitioner Vs.

State Rep. By Inspector of Police, R.S.Puram Police Station, Coimbatore District.

(Crime No.155 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.155 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner :

Mr.C.Iyyappa Raj For Respondent :

Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.03.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(b), 22(b), 22(c), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985 and Section 4(1)(a) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, Section 4(1)(C) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment Act), 2024 in Crime No.155 of 2025, registered on the file of 1/4

the respondent, seeks bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, along with the other accused, were found in possession of 24.40 grams of MDMA pills contained in zip-lock covers, 1620 grams of green ganja contained in a polythene cover, cash of Rs.21,00,000/-, a money counting electronic machine, bottles of liquor (Corona Extra La Cerveza Mas Fina @ Premium Peer, and HOEGAARDEN), a WRITER, CYT Merlot wine, and a SWIFT TOURS vehicle bearing Reg.No.TN-99 AD 2499. A TECNO P 66IN light- green colour cellphone was also seized. In total, 92.43 grams of cocaine, 36.87 grams of TMDMA, and 4.316 kg of ganja were seized by the respondent police. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. However, he is suffering incarceration from 27.03.2025. He further submitted that there is no recovery from this petitioner and that the co-accused was enlarged on bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.13093 & 14861 of 2025. He also submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court, Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 2/4

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner was remanded to Judicial custody on 27.03.2025 for the possession of commercial quantity of contraband of MDMA tablets, Liquors, and Ganja. The accused is a habitual offender. Hence, he strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. I have also gone through the submissions on both sides and perused the records. Admittedly, the petitioner had also travelled along with the first accused, and contraband was also recovered from the co-accused which is commercial quantity. Hence, I am of the view that since the petitioner, along with the first accused, were under the conscious possession, and though there is no recovery from this petitioner, he cannot be placed on a same footing with the other accused who have been granted bail by this Court in the connected petitions. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

kmm

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 19.11.2025 kmm To

1. The Inspector of Police, R.S.Puram Police Station, Coimbatore District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

Crl.O.P.No.30945 of 2025 4/4