Elango @ Dulasidas v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, New Town

Crl.OP(MD)No.8346 of 2026 P. DHANABAL , J.

Today, this matter is listed under the caption "For Being Mentioned" at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that she had wrongly mentioned the name of the prison in the present petition, which was subsequently reflected in the order copy dated 10.06.2026, as "The Superintendent, District Prison, Thanjavur" instead of "The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy". Therefore, the said error has to be corrected and a fresh order copy may be issued.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent also conceded to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. Upon perusing the records, it is seen that no error has occurred in the order portion. However, in the "copy-to" portion, the name of the prison has been mentioned as "The Superintendent, District Prison, Thanjavur" instead of "The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy". 1/9

5. Therefore, the Registry is directed to correct the name of the prison as "The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy" in the order dated 10.06.2026 in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.8346 of 2026 and issue a fresh order copy to the petitioner. 11.06.2026 mkn 2/9

P.DHANABAL , J.

mkn Crl.OP(MD)No.8346 of 2026 11.06.2026 3/9

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 8346 of 2026 Elango @ Dulasidas

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, New Town Police Station, Cuddalore District.

(Crime No.442 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Ms.N.Ratchaka Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 442 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.10.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C) r/w. 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.442 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

4/9

2. The case of the prosecution is that on secret information the respondent police went to the scene of occurrence and found that the accused persons are in possession of 22 kilograms of ganja. 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. Based on confession statement of the co-accused, this petitioner has been implicated in this case and no recovery has been made from this petitioner. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. Totally there are 17 accused in this case. On the basis of the confession statement made by the A1, this petitioner has been implicated in this case. The recovery was made from the A1. Totally 22 kgs. of Ganja has been transported. Out of which 5 kgs. were sold by the accused themselves. The petitioner has one previous case under IPC offence. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on 5/9

record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, though it is stated that the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity, it is also stated that out of 22 kgs. of Ganja 5 Kgs. of Ganja were sold by the accused persons themselves, hence, the quantity involved in this case is not commercial quantity, the petitioner has no previous case for the similar kind of offence, though the petitioner has one previous case under IPC, in that case he was granted bail, and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, 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 learned Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur, at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, 6/9

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;

[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 her 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) 10.06.2026 TM 7/9

To 1.The Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur.

2.The Inspector of Police, New Town Police Station, Cuddalore District. (Crime No.442 of 2025) 3.The Superintendent, District Prison, Thanjavur. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

8/9

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 8346 of 2026 Date : 10.06.2026 9/9