Yasu Das R A v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 07.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Yasu Das RA

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Intelligence Officer Directorate of Revenue Intelligence T.Nagar, Chennai F.No.DRI/CZU/MDU/VIII/48/ENQ-1/INT-01/2024...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Kasi Vishwanathan. R.N. For Respondent : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar Speical Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in F.No.DRI/CZU/MDU/VIII/48/ENQ-1/INT-01/2024 on the file of the respondent.

1/7

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / A4, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.03.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 21(c), 22(c),28 and 29 of NDPS Act in F.No.DRI/ CZU/ MDU/ VIII/48/ ENQ-1/ INT-01/ 2024 on the file of the respondent seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused were found in illegal possession of 38kgs of Methaphetamine, which is commercial quantity. 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 except the confession of the co-accused there is no other material against the petitioner. The only material which is relied upon by the prosecution is CDR particulars. By mere whatsapp messages or whatsapp calls the guilt of the petitioner cannot be proved. When admittedly no contraband was recovered from this petitioner, the petitioner is now in custody from 02.03.2024 and is in incarceration only based on the said CDR 2/7

particulars. Even complaint has been filed there are no material as against the petitioner. Therefore this Court has to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the total quantity of contraband seized was 37.645 kgs which is commercial quantity valued approximately Rs.180crores in the international market. He would further submit that the contraband intended for delivery in Madurai and subsequently smuggled to Srilanka through coastal route. He would further submit that the petitioner actively involved in the illegal smuggling activities. He would further submit that mobile number used by A1 corresponds with those found in the mobile number of A4 which indicates that A3 and A4 were in contact with A1 using the same number in connection with the smuggling activities. Further after the arrest of A4 some of the accused are also absconding. Further the petitioner himself admitted that he had collected Rs.1,00,00,000/- on behalf of A2 and handed it over to A1's brother which indicates his role in the financial transactions. There are materials available as against the petitioner. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

3/7

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 also the considering the fact that no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and only based on the confession statement given by the co-accused this petitioner has been implicated as an accused and no previous case is pending against the petitioner thereby complied with the condition under Section 37 of NDPS Act and also taking note of the fact that trial has not been commenced and the case is pending for a long time and also taking into consideration the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner from 02.03.2024, 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 Principal District and Sessions Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai and on further conditions that:

4/7

[b] the petitioner shall stay at Madurai and report before the trial Court everyday at 10.30 a.m.,and 5.00 pm., until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not leave India without obtaining prior permission from the trial court.

[d] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;

[e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[f] 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; [g] 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 5/7

[(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

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

(P D B J) 07.04.2026 aav To 1.The Principal District and Sessions Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai

2. The Intelligence Officer Directorate of Revenue Intelligence T.Nagar, Chennai

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

6/7

P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 7184 of 2025 Date : 07.04.2026 7/7