P.Esakkiraj v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL P.Esakkiraj

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Eraniel Police Station Kanyakumari District (Crime No. 275 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Vinoharan For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate(Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.275 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/5

The petitioner / A2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C) r/w. 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act in Crime No.275 of 2025 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 31.939kgs of ganja in a Hyundai car bearing Reg.No.TN 02 AY 5451 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 petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.04.2025. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner along with other accused were found in illegal possession of 31.939kgs of ganja in a Hyundai car bearing Reg.No.TN 02 AY 5451 which is a commercial quantity. He would further 2/5

submit that the petitioner also travelled in the car in which the contraband was transported. 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 considering the nature of offences and also taking into consideration the quantity of contraband involved in this case and the fact that the petitioner also travelled in the car in which the contraband was transported 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 at this stage.

7. Hence the petition stands dismissed.

(P D B J) 18.06.2026 aav 3/5

To

1. The Inspector of Police, Eraniel Police Station Kanyakumari 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. 8759 of 2026 Date : 18.06.2026 5/5