Saranraj v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Velankanni

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

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Velankanni Police Station Nagapattinam District (Crime No. 276 of 2025 )

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Murugavel For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate(Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.276 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/5

The petitioner / A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C) r/w. 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act in Crime No.276 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 160kgs of ganja in a Maruthi Suzuki Dzure car bearing Reg.No.TN 31 BB1652 and a Bolero Pick up van bearing Reg.No.TN 60 AL 6685. The 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 19.07.2025. 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 found in illegal possession of 160kgs of ganja in a Maruthi Suzuki Dzure 2/5

car bearing Reg.No.TN 31 BB1652 and a Bolero Pick up van bearing Reg.No.TN 60 AL 6685. He would further submit that this is the second application for bail and there is no change in circumstances to consider the present petition for bail. 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 considering the nature of offences and also taking into consideration the gravity of offence and also the fact that there is no change in circumstances of the case to consider the present petition for bail even after dismissal of the earlier petition, hence this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Hence the petition stands dismissed.

(P D B J) 17.06.2026 aav 3/5

To

1. The Inspector of Police, Velankanni Police Station Nagapattinam District 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10319 of 2026 Date : 17.06.2026 5/5