Ramesh v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 22.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Ramesh

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station Madurai.

(Crime No. 65 of 2026 )

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Jeyaaron Raja Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 65 of 2026 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 25.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1) of NDPS, Act, 1985 in Crime No. 65 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information, on 26.02.2026, at about 10.55 hrs, when the respondents police were in patrol duty, they found that the petitioner along with other accused was in illegal possession of 21 kgs 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 no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and entire contraband was recovered from A1 and based on the confession statement of A1, the petitioner has been arrayed as accused. He would further submit that co-accused were already granted bail. He 2/7

would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.03.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner along with other accused was in illegal possession of 21 kgs of ganja, due to which the case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1) of NDPS, Act, 1985 in Crime No. 65 of 2026. He would further submit that the petitioner has 13 previous cases and he is a history sheeter. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he strongly 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, nature of offence, and considering the facts that though the prosecution stated that quantity of contraband involved in this case is a 3/7

commercial quantity, no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and entire contraband was recovered from A1 and based on the confession statement of A1, the petitioner has been arrayed as accused and co-accused were already granted bail and also considering the fact that though the petitioner has 13 previous cases, in all cases bail was granted to him and also considering 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, 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 NDPS Act cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

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

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;

[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) 22.06.2026 apd 5/7

To 1.The Principal Special Court for NDPS Act cases, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukottai Police Station Madurai.

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

6/7

P. DHANABAL, J apd

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10289 of 2026 Date : 22.06.2026 7/7