Mahidhar Reddy v. Union Of India

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 29.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 4673 of 2026 Mahidhar Reddy

...Petitioner

Vs Union of India Rep by the Superintendent of Police, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal Unit, Chennai. NCB.F.NO.48/1/03/2025 NCB/MDU.

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Karuppasamy Pandian for Mr.R.Vignesh Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.C.Arul Vadivel @ Sekar Special Public Prosecutor for NCB Cases PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in NCB.F.NO.48/1/03/2025 NCB/MDU on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.01.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w. 1/6

20(b)(ii)(C), 28 and 29 (1) of NDPS Act, in NCB.F.NO.48/1/03/2025 NCB/MDU on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 12.02.2025, the respondent received secret information. On that basis, they went to the scene of occurrence and seized the vehile in the ECR Road Junction, Rameswaram National Highway, Ramanathapuram and recovered 273.360 kgs. of ganja. 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. The petitioner was arrested after one year of the occurrence, stating that the petitioner's aadhar card was found in that place. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The car belonged to one travel agency and the A1 booked the Car and this petitioner paid the rent. The quantity involved is commercial quantity. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. However, the petitioner has no previous case. The 2/6

investigation is still pending. The accused belongs to Andra Predesh. Hence, they are unable to secure him and only secured on 13.01.2026.

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 charges levelled against the petitioner, according to the prosecution the abundant car was found on 12.02.2025 itself, thereafter A1 has been summoned on 08.01.2026, thereafter A1 was arrested after one year and this petitioner was arrayed as accused on the basis of the confession statement of A1, the petitioner has no previous case, even according to the prosecution A1 alone booked the car from travel agency and A2, this petitioner paid the money to the travel agency and the same can be considered during the trial and not at this stage, and 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 3/6

satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court for E.C. and NDPS Cases, Pudukkottai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police 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;

[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]. 4/6

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 29.04.2026 TM To 1.The Additional District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court for E.C. and NDPS Cases, Pudukkottai.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal Unit, Chennai. NCB.F.NO.48/1/03/2025 NCB/MDU. 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 4673 of 2026 Date : 29.04.2026 6/6