Muhammed Anas v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 25.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Muhammed Anas

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, NIBCID Kanyakumari District (Crime No. 2 of 2022)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Anand For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 2 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police. 1/6

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.04.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c)r/w. 20(b)(ii)(c) and 25 of NDPS Act in Crime No.2 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 26.06.2021 at about 2.00 a.m., on the secret information the respondent police went to the spot and found a abandoned car bearing Reg.No. KL 01 CD 5690 which was parked near Andukodu Pandhipalam and after search they found 210kgs of ganja . Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent police has registered a false case against the petitioner and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that similarly placed accused were granted bail by this Court Further in the present case the place of occurrence has been shifted by the prosecution from the spot that has been mentioned in the FIR to another place. Further in the First Information Report the car was said to be found 2/6

at Pandhipalam whereas in the charge sheet a different story has been attributed. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.04.2024 and no similar kind of previous cases are pending against the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity. The petitioner and the other accused have only participated in the transportation of ganja. This is the sixth bail application and already five applications were dismissed as withdrawn. There is no merit in this application and thereby he seeks to dismiss the petition. Further the respondent police is also ready to co-operate for the speedy disposal of the case

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 and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would be considered during trial. Now the trial has been 3/6

commenced and the investigation officer was also examined and only three more witnesses have to be cross examined. Further a petition was also filed to recall the witnesses and the same was allowed. This Court also dismissed the earlier bail applications and therefore at this stage it is not appropriate to allow the petition.

7. Hence the petition stands dismissed. However the trial Court is directed to dispose the case as expeditiously as possible without granting any long adjournments beyond three days. The respondent police is also directed to produce the witnesses without any delay and co-operate for speedy disposal of the case.

(P D B J) 25.03.2026 aav To 1.The Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases,Madurai 2 .The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/6

P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12828 of 2025 Date : 25.03.2026 5/6

6/6