Rajesh @ Bomb Rajesh v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Cuddalore Nt

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 12.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 8335 of 2026 Rajesh @ Bomb Rajesh ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Cuddalore NT Police Station, Cuddalore District.

(Crime No.442 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Gavin Silvester Advocate For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 442 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent 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 anticipatory 1/6

bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on secret information on 05.10.2025 the respondent police went to the scene of occurrence, where they found 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. Though the quantity involved is commercial quantity, no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and the entire contraband have been recovered from main accused persons. This petitioner has been implicated on the basis of the confession statement of the co-accused. Co-accused in this case have been released on bail. Hence, he prayed anticipatory bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity. The entire contraband has been recovered from co-accused. On their confession statement other accused persons have been implicated in this case. The petitioner has four previous 2/6

cases. Investigation has been completed and charge has also been filed before the concerned Court. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, the quantity involved in this case is not commercial quantity, no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and the contraband was recovered from the co-accused, based on the confession statement of the co-accused he was implicated in this case, though the petitioner has some previous cases, in all those cases, he was granted anticipatory bail and considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Additional District Judge, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur, on condition that the petitioner shall 3/6

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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Additional District Judge, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur, at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, until further orders:

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[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 4/6

registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

(P D B J) 12.06.2026 TM To 1.The Additional District Judge, Special Court under Essential Commodities Act, Thanjavur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Cuddalore NT Police Station, Cuddalore District. (Crime No.442 of 2025) 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 8335 of 2026 Date : 12.06.2026 6/6