Kamesh @ Kamalesh v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Uchipuli

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Kamesh @ kamalesh

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station Rameswaram (Crime No. 100 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Subburaj For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 100 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. 1/5

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / A2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.05.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c)r/w. 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act in Crime No.100 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused were found in illegal possession of 32kgs of ganja. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent police has registered a false case against the petitioner and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that based on the confession given by the co-accused this petitioner has been implicated as an accused and no contraband was recovered from this petitioner. He would further submit that after registration of the first case the next case was registered immediately on the next day. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.05.2025 Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 2/5

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that petitioner along with other accused were found in illegal possession of 32kgs of ganja which is a commercial quantity. There are materials available as against the petitioner. Hence, he 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 and the fact that the contraband involved in this case is commercial quantity and also the fact that one case is registered as against the petitioner for commercial quantity and though the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that after registration of the first case the next day this case was registered and thereby doubt would arise about the genuineness of the case, the said aspect cannot be considered at the time of considering the bail application and it can be decided during trial and also considering the gravity of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

3/5

7. Hence the petition stands dismissed.

(P D B J) 15.04.2026 aav To 1.The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station Rameswaram 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 3352 of 2026 Date : 15.04.2026 5/5