P.Chandran v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 08.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL P.Chandran

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Devadanapatti Police Station Theni District (Crime No. 430 of 2024)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.Na.Manimaran For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 430 of 2024 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 22.12.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c)r/w. 20(b)(ii)(c),29(1) and 25 of NDPS Act in Crime No.430 of 2024 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 21.217 kgs 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 the respondent police has not followed the mandatory provisions under Sections 42,50,52(A) and 57 of NDPS Act. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.12.2024. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner along with other accused were 2/5

found in illegal possession of 21.217 kgs of ganja which is a commercial quantity. He would further submit that there are some previous cases pending 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 the petitioner is having some previous cases for similar kind of offences and also the fact that the petitioner failed to satisfy the twin test as contemplated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Hence the petition stands dismissed.

(P D B J) 08.04.2026 aav 3/5

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Devadanapatti Police Station Theni District 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6775 of 2025 Date : 08.04.2026 5/5