Mariselvam v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Pew-Madurai City

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 07.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 317 of 2026 Mariselvam ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, PEW Madurai Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.252 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Joshua Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 252 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.11.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(B) r/w 8(c) and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985, in Crime No.252 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

1/6

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 15.11.2025, on secret information, the police officials went to the surveillance. At that time, the the accused persons illegally possessed with 23 kgs. of banned contraband. Hence, the case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has not involved in any offence as alleged in the FIR. Originally the petitioner went to Eriyodu on the date occurrence. At that time, the police officials searched the petitioner on the basis of the confession made by the 5th accused and arrested him. He was false implicated in this case. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the offences are grave in nature. The 23 kgs. of contraband was recovered from one Muthumani's house near Harvipatty, Madurai District. On the basis of the co-accused the petitioner was implicated in this case. Investigation is in initial stage. The petitioner is having five previous cases, but not similar in nature. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

2/6

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of offence, and no contraband was recovered from this petitioner, the contraband was recovered from one Muthumani, Harvipatty, who is the first accused in this case, a cell phone alone was recovered from this petitioner, though the petitioner has some previous cases, they are not similar in nature and in all those cases, the petitioner was granted bail and also considering the period of incarceration of the petitioner from 15.11.2025, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Principal Special Court for Trial of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

3/6

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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)AIR SCW 5560]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 06.04.2026 TM 4/6

To 1.The Principal Special Court for Trial of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, PEW Madurai Police Station, Madurai District. (Crime No.252 of 2025) 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Dindigul. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 317 of 2026 Date : 07.04.2026 6/6