← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10676/2026granted

C.Pratyush Mohanty v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Nib - Cid

2026-06-17Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 17/06/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL C.Pratyush Mohanty ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, NIB - CID, Ramnad District.

Crime No.04/2025. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- To grant Bail for the petitioner / accused no.1 in Crime no. 4 /2025 on C.C.No.185 of 2025 the file of the Additional District and session Judge EC and NDPS Act cases Pudukottai and thus render justice.

For Petitioner : Na.Mani Maran, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(C) and 25 of NDPS Act, in Crime No. 4 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information, on 02.04.2025, at about 12.15 a.m., the respondent police went to the Paramakudi Railway Station and found that the petitioner and another accused were in illegal joint possession of 22.400 kg 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 the petitioner was in separate possession of 11.200 kgs of ganja, which is not a commercial quantity. He would further submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner and the co-accused was already released on bail by this Court and he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.04.2025. 2/6

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 22.400 kgs of ganja, which is a commercial quantity. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner and the co-accused was already released on bail by this Court.

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 prosecution stated that the quantity of contraband involved in this case is a commercial quantity, the contraband recovered from two different have been clubbed together and termed as a 'commercial quantity' and as far as this petitioner is concerned, the alleged contraband recovered is 3/6

11.200 kg and the same is not a commercial quantity and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and the co-accused was already released on bail by this Court 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, 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 Additional District and session Judge EC and NDPS Act cases Pudukottai and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court under Essential Commodities and NDPS Act, Pudukottai, daily 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 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 4/6

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].

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

(P D B J) 17.06.2026 dss 5/6

P. DHANABAL,J DSS TO

1. The Additional District and session Judge EC and NDPS Act cases Pudukottai.

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

3. The Superintendent, District Prison, Pudukkottai District.

4. The Inspector of Police, NIB - CID, Ramnad District.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10676 of 2026 Date : 17/06/2026 6/6