Arunkumar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Arunkumar

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Annamalai Nagar Police Station, Cuddalore.

(Crime No. 69 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Banuprasath Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 69 of 2025on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/7

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act, 1985 in Crime No. 69 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information, on 19.04.2025, when the respondent police was in patrol duty, they found that the petitioner and other accused were in illegal possession of 21.100 kgs of ganja for sale. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that entire contraband was recovered from A1 alone and no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and based on the confession of co-accused only, the petitioner has been arrayed as accused and already A6 was granted bail by this Court. He would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.04.2025. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner. 2/7

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner and other accused were in illegal possession of 21.100 kgs of ganja for sale, due to which the case has been registered under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act, 1985. He would further submit that the petitioner has four previous cases, which are under IPC. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

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, nature of offence, and considering the facts that entire contraband was recovered from A1 alone and even according to the prosecution, no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and based on the confession of co-accused only, the petitioner has been arrayed as accused and already A6 was granted bail by this Court and though the petitioner has four previous cases, the same are not similar in nature and 3/7

in all cases bail was granted to the petitioner and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, 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 learned Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under EC Act, Thanjavur, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under EC Act, Thanjavur, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[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;

4/7

[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) 16.04.2026 apd 5/7

To 1.The Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under EC Act, Thanjavur 2.The Inspector of Police, Annamalai Nagar Police Station, Cuddalore.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Cuddalore. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

6/7

P. DHANABAL, J apd

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 2706 of 2026 Date : 16.04.2026 7/7