← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/13067/2025granted

Karthick v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By

2026-04-07Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 07/04/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Karthick ... Petitioner/Accused No.5 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Gudalur North Police Station, Theni.

(Crime No.252 of 2024). ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.252 of 2024 on the file of the Respondent Police.

For Petitioner : M/s. S.Srikanth, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambiselvan Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

The petitioner / A5, who was arrested and remanded to judicial 1/6

custody on 26.02.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1), 27(A) and 25 of NDPS Act, 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 pm, on the secret information, the respondent police went to the place of occurrence, near Gudalur by-pass pirivu at PSC Theater of CumbumKumily Road, and intercepted the vehicle bearing Reg.No.TN-58BW-9103. On searching, the co-accused were found in illegal possession of 22.725 kgs of ganja. Based on their confession, the petitioner was arrested on 26.02.2025. 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 recovery was made from the petitioner and only based on the confession of the co-accused, the petitioner was implicated in this case and he has no previous case and he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.02.2025. Therefore, 2/6

prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner on the ground that the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity and the offence is grave in nature. Apart from that, there are some material as against the petitioner in respect of call details and bank statement.

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 involved in this case is commercial quantity, no contraband was recovered from the petitioner and only based on the confession statement, he was arrayed as accused and no previous case is pending against him and though the learned learned Additional Public Prosecutor objected the petition on the ground that there are some material in respect of call details and bank statement, those can be tested only during trial 3/6

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 Principal Special Court for Trial of NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the trial Court on all working day 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;

[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 4/6

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.

07.04.2026 dss P. DHANABAL,J dss TO 5/6

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

2. The Inspector of Police, Gudalur North Police Station, Theni.

3.The Superintendent, District Jail , Theni.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.13067 of 2025 Date : 07/04/2026 6/6