J.Saravanaraj v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR J.Saravanaraj ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, D2, Anna Salai Police Station, Chennai - 600 002.

(Crime No.205 of 2024) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.205 of 2024 pending on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner :

Mr.D.Kannan 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 03.09.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(A), 22(b) and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985 in Crime No.205 of 2024, registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail. 1/6

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is ranked as A5 in this case and he assisted A1 and A4 for transporting ill-gotten money generated by them. It is further alleged that on 09.11.2024, A1 was arrested for possession of Methamphetamine 5 grams. A2 and A3 were arrested and they were found in possession of Methamphetamine, OG Ganja, MDMA tablets, Malana Cream, Malana Super Cream and Hashish Oil. On the basis of statement recorded from A2 and A3, A4 was also arrested. It was revealed that, this petitioner assisted A1 and A4 for transferring drug money and on 09.11.2024, a sum of Rs.28,000/- has been transferred. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the co-accused were released on bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.30730 of 2024 and Crl.O.P.No.31629 of 2024 by an order dated 16.12.2024 and 03.01.2025 respectively. He further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner assisted in, transfer of money for the purpose of sale of narcotic drugs and since the petitioner is a running licensed money exchange services, he had had served to various persons. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are several money transactions taken place between the petitioner and other accused and he used to collect huge commissions. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the overt act attributed against the petitioner that he assisted A1 and A4 to transfer the money from A2 and he has not directly involved in transportation of narcotic drugs and co-accused released on bail also similarly placed, and on account of parity, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions:

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

3/6

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30.a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; [d] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses; [e] the petitioner to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

4/6

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 10.12.2025 sma Note :

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies.

To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. II Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai 2.The Inspector of Police, D2, Anna Salai Police Station, Chennai - 600 002.

3.The Central Prison, Puzhal.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

sma 10.12.2025 6/6