Mani Raj v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 12.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Maniraj

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep .by The Inspector of Police Keelaiyur Police Sation NIB-CID, Nagapattinam Police Station, Nagapattinam District Crime No.143 of 2024

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Ananda Padmanabhan, Senior Counsel For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No.143 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/4

The petitioner / A3, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.07.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w. 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1) and 25 of NDPS Act in Crime No.143 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 200kgs of ganja, which is a 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. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.07.2024. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that petitioner along with other accused were found in illegal possession of 200kgs of ganja, which is a commercial quantity. He would further submit that one previous case is pending against the petitioner. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. 2/4

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 considering the fact that the petitioner acted as a driver in which the commercial quantity of contraband was transported and also the fact that the petitioner is having one similar kind of previous offence and also considering the gravity of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Hence the petition stands dismissed.

(P D B J) 12.06.2026 aav To

1. The Inspector of Police Keelaiyur Ppolice Sation NIB-CID, Nagapattinam Police Station, Nagapattinam District

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

3/4

P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 8160 of 2026 Date : 12.06.2026 4/4