Vingesh v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Kanyakumari

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Vingesh, S/o.Ganapathi, No.7a,Keela Street, Kailasapuram, Tirunelveli Junction, Tirunelveli District..

... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Kanniyakumari Police Station, Kanniyakumari District.

(In Crime No.194 of 2025).

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Micheal Heldon Kumar, 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.194 of 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 08.05.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985, in Crime No.194 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.05.2025 at about 08.00 a.m., based on the secret information received by the Sub Inspector of Police, while he along with police party was on patrol duty near Kanniyakumari to Anjugramam Road, the respondent police found that the petitioner and other accused person were in illegal possession of 29.900 kgs of Ganja in bike bearing Registration No.TN 02 AZ 4977. Hence, the case.

2/8

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the respondent police have registered a false case against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985. The petitioner is an innocent and he is nothing to do with the alleged offences. He would further contend that the no contraband was recovered from the petitioner and based on the confession of coaccused, he has been arrayed as A2. He would further submit that the co-accused was released on bail. He is in judicial custody from 08.05.2025. Therefore prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the accused persons were found in illegal possession of 29.900 kgs of Ganja. He would 3/8

further submit that the petitioner has no previous cases. He would further submit that the investigation is still 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 though the quantity of the contraband involved in this case is a commercial quantity, no contraband was recovered from the petitioner and the entire contraband was recovered from A1 and based on the confession of co-accused, he has been arrayed as A2 and the petitioner has no previous cases and the co-accused was released on bail and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner from 4/8

08.05.2025, 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 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 at 10.30 a.m., and 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 Prison, Palayamkottai.

3.The Inspector of Police, Kanniyakumari Police Station, Kanniyakumari 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.10850 of 2026 Date : 16/06/2026 8/8