K.Pasupathipandiyan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Kenikkarai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 30.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No.6304 of 2026 K.Pasupathipandiyan ... Petitioner/Accused No.4 Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Kenikkarai Police Station, Ramanathapuram.

(Crime No.491 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- To enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.491 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Murugan, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to 1/5

judicial custody on 27.12.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(1) of the Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in Crime No.491 of 2025 on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 24.12.2025 at about 14.30 hours, on secret information, the respondent police went to the place of occurrence and on seeing the police party, the accused tried to escape from the scene of occurrence. However, the respondent police nabbed them except one accused and on searching, they were found in possession of 542 of kg 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. He would further submit that the petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.12.2025. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 2/5

respondent would submit that the petitioner and the other accused were found in illegal possession of 542 of kg of ganja and the contraband involved in this case is a commercial quantity and the recovery was made from the house of the petitioner. 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 the quantity involved in this case is a commercial quantity and as per prosecution case, the contraband was recovered from the house of the petitioner and thereby, the petitioner failed to comply with the Section 37 of NDPS Act and taking into considering the gravity of offence, I am declined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 3/5

(P D B J) 30.04.2026 dss To 1.The Inspector of Police, Kenikkarai Police Station, Ramanathapuram.

2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P. DHANABAL,J DSS

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6304 of 2026 Date : 30.04.2026 5/5