Anandaraj v. The State Of Tamilnadu Represented By The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Anandaraj, S/o.Thangaraj, Patur,Sokkanakalai, Agamalai Village, Periyakulam , Theni District..

... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Thenkarai Police Station Theni District.

Crime No. 759/2025..

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Ms.M.Nithya Sowmya, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS 1/8

PRAYER :- C-32B. For Bail in Crime No. 759/2025 on the file of the respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.12.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985, in Crime No.759 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 05.12.2025, at about 06.30 hours, based on the secret information, the respondent Police conducted vehicle check up near Thamarai college diversion, periyakulam, to Tehni main road, and found that the petitioner and other accused persons were in illegal possession of 22.820 kgs of Ganja in two packs. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent 2/8

Police registered a case against the petitioner and others for the offences punishable under Sections 88(C) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985. He would further contend that he is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the co-accused were arrested and released on bail. He is in judicial custody from 05.12.2025. Therefore, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the contraband recovered is a commercial quantity and the offences are grave in nature. He would further submit that the investigation is pending. The petitioner has no previous cases. However, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

3/8

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, nature of offence, and though the quantity of the contraband involved in this case is a commercial quantity, the contraband was recovered from this petitioner and the same was recovered from different persons under separate mahazars, which have been clubbed together and the petitioner has no previous cases and the investigation might have been completed and as far as this petitioner is concerned, the contraband recovered from the petitioner is 2.170 kgs and the same is not a commercial quantity and the co-accused were arrested and released on bail and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner from 05.12.2025, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject 4/8

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 Principal Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Principal Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, on all working days Morning at 10.30 a.m., and Evening at 05.00 p.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;

5/8

[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].

6/8

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 16.06.2026 VSG TO 1.The learned Principal Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai.

2.The Superintendent, Central Jail, Madurai.

3.The Inspector of Police, Thenkarai Police Station Theni District.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

7/8

P. DHANABAL,J., vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10604 of 2026 Date : 16/06/2026 8/8