Bala @ Balakrishnan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thiruchitrambalam

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Bala@ Balakrishnan

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thiruchitrambalam Police Station, Thanjavur District (Crime No.248 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Vijayaraja For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate(Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No.248 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioner / A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.09.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w. 20(b) (ii) (C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act in Crime No.248 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 237.700 Kgs of ganja. 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 24.09.2025. He would further submit that no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and only based on the confession statement given by the co- accused this petitioner has been implicated as an accused. 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 2/6

found in illegal possession of 237.700 Kgs of ganja.which is a commercial quantity. There are materials available as against the petitioner. 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 though the contraband involved in this case is a commercial quantity the entire contraband was recovered from other accused and no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and this petitioner was not present in the scene of occurrence and only based on the confession statement given by the co-accused this petitioner has been implicated as an accused and though the prosecution has stated that based on the direction given by this petitioner they transported the contraband to the location sent by the petitioner in that location the petitioner was not present and even as per the case of prosecution the contraband was recovered from other accused namely Seenivasa Perumal and Muthumalai and the name of the petitioner does not found place in the recovery mahazhar and also taking into consideration the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner and 3/6

also the fact that no previous case is pending against 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 Additional District and Sessions Judge, Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Thanjavur and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the trial Court on daily at 10.30 a.m.,and 5.30 pm., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he 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 4/6

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) 17.06.2026 aav To 1.The Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Thanjavur 2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruchitrambalam Police Station, Thanjavur District

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10133 of 2026 Date : 17.06.2026 6/6