V.Anand v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 9412 of 2025 V.Anand
...Petitioner/Accused No.3
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thiruppapuliyur Police Station Cuddalore District.
(Crime No. 129 of 2025 )
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Arun Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Government Pleader PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 129 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. 1/7
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / A3, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.03.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS, Act, 1985, in Crime No. 129 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused were found in illegal possession of 23 kg of ganja and the petitioner was found in possession of 1 kg 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. He would further submit that even though as per prosecution, total contraband seized from all the accused is 23 kg, the contraband recovered from the petitioner is only 1 kg and to that effect separate mahazar has been preferred and he has 1 previous case, which is not similar in nature and he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.03.2025. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner. 2/7
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner on the ground that the offence are grave in nature and the commercial quantity is involved in this case. However, he fairly conceded that the petitioner has 1 previous case, which are not similar in nature and the case was posted for trial.
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, the nature of the offence and the quantity of contraband involved in this case is not commercial quantities; however, the prosecution clubs all the contraband recovered from different persons from different mahazars. As far as the petitioner is concerned, separate mahazar has been preferred and only 1 kg of contraband was seized from him, which is not a commercial quantity and he has no previous case in similar nature of offence and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the 3/7
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 Judicial Magistrate-II, Cuddalore and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the trial Court on all working day at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which 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;
4/7
[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) 30.03.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Cuddalore.
2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppapuliyur Police Station, Cuddalore District.
3. The Superintendent, Cuddalore Central Prison, Cuddalore.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/7
P. DHANABAL, J dss
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 9412 of 2025 6/7
Date : 30.03.2026 7/7