Babu @ Babu Sahulin v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Babu @ Babu Sahulin.

... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narcotic Intelligent Bureau (Nibcid), Thoothukudi.

Crime No. 02/2024..

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.RL Dhilipan Pandian for Mr.John Berlamen G, For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- To enlarge the petitioner on bail in C.C.No. 262/2024 on the file of the II Additional Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai in Crime No. 02/2024 dated 22.01.2024 on the file of the Respondent Police 1/7

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.07.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1), 25 of NDPS, Act, 1985 in Crime No. 02 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information about illegal transportation of contraband to Sri Lanka via Coastal area near Muthaiyapuram, on 11.12.2023, at about 03.00 p.m., the respondent police intercepted the vehicle bearing Registration No. TN 50 D 2896 and found that the accused persons were in illegal possession of 529 kgs of ganja in the said vehicle. 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. Recovery was not made from the petitioner and he has been arrayed as an accused based on the confession of co-accused. More over, investigation in this case has been completed and the case is posted for 2/7

trial. He would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.07.2024. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent would submit that the accused persons were found in illegal possession of 549 kgs of ganja. He would further submit that the alleged quantity is commercial quantity. The petitioner has previous cases. Though the investigation in this case is completed, considering the grave offence and the quantity involved. 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 though the quantity of contraband involved in this case is commercial quantity, the same was not recovered from the petitioner and he has been arrayed as an accused 3/7

based on the confession of co-accused and also considering the fact that though the petitioner has previous cases, he was granted bail in the cases registered against him as well as the long period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and 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 learned II Additional District Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Madurai District, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the II Additional District Court, NDPS Act Cases, Madurai District 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;

4/7

[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 him 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].

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

(P D B J) 15.06.2026 PNM TO 5/7

1. The II Additional District Judge, NDPS Act Cases, Madurai District

2. Do-Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tuticorin District.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli.

4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narcotic Intelligent Bureau (Nibcid), Thoothukudi.

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

6/7

P. DHANABAL,J PNM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8425 of 2026 Date : 15/06/2026 7/7