Dineshkumar v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 09/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Dineshkumar ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Gudalur North Police Station, Theni District.

Cr.No.252 of 2024..

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.D.Rameshkumar, For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No.252 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police. 1/7

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.12.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii) (C), 29(1), 27A and 25 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in Crime No.252 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 18.12.2024 at about 08.30 hours, a secret information received by the respondent police that there was transportation of huge quantity of ganja in the Ertiga Car bearing Registration No.TN-58-BW-9103. The respondent police intercepted and searched the vehicle, and found the petitioner and other four accused to be in joint possession of 22.725 Kgs of ganja. The said contraband was seized by the respondent police. Hence, the above case registered against the petitioner and other accused for the alleged above offences.

2/7

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. It is alleged that the petitioner was in separate possession of 3.785 kgs of ganja only. He would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.12.2024. In this case, coaccused were already released on bail. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner and other accused were found in illegal possession of 22.725kgs of ganja, which is a commercial quantity. He would further submit that though the petitioner has no previous cases, considering the nature of grave offence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

3/7

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and though as per prosecution, the quantity of contraband involved in this case is a commercial quantity, the contraband were recovered through separate mahazar from different persons and the same has been clubbed together and treated as commercial quantity. As far as this petitioner is concerned, the alleged contraband recovered from him is 3.785 kgs and the same is not a commercial quantity. Considering further the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and 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 Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the Principal Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, daily 4/7

at 10.30 a.m., 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 him 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].

5/7

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

(P D B J) 09.06.2026 PNM TO

1. The Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai

2. Do-Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theni District.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai.

4. The Inspector of Police, Gudalur North Police Station, Theni District.

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

6/7

P. DHANABAL,J PNM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10501 of 2026 Date : 09/06/2026 7/7