Sathiyaraj v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 13216 of 2025 Sathiyaraj ... Petitioner/Accused No.5 Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Madurai NIB CID, Madurai.

(Crime No.2 of 2024) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.P.Thanga Prithvi Rajan Advocate.

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 2024 on the file of the respondent police. 1/6

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / A5, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.07.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 & 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985, in Crime No. 2 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 14.01.2024, at about 02.30 p.m, based on the secret information, the respondent police went to Trichy National Highways No.38, Shell Petrol Bunk Opposite, near Authukal Junction Pirivu and found the accused along with a four wheeler bearing Reg.No.TN-64-4858 and a two wheeler bearing Reg.No.TN-59-CK-4966. On seeing the police party, A1 to A3 are said to have tried to escape from the scene of occurrence. However, the respondent police nabbed them and on searching, A1 to A3 were found in illegal possession of 100 kgs of ganja. Based on their confession, the respondent police registered a case against A1 to A3, the petitioner and another person and also arrested them. Hence, this petition. 2/6

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 he has been arrayed as accused only based on the confession of A1 to A3 and he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.07.2024. Therefore, he prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that totally 5 accused are involved in this case including the petitioner. Even though no recovery was made from the petitioner, A1 to A3 purchased the alleged contraband, which was involved in this case from the petitioner herein and he is the seller of the contraband. He would further submit that the quantity of contraband involved in this case is a commercial quantity and the petitioner is having has 3 previous cases. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

3/6

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 the quantity of contraband involved in this case is a commercial quantity and even though no recovery was made from the petitioner and he has been arrayed as accused based on the confession of A1 to A3, the petitioner is having 3 previous cases for the commercial quantity and he is in inside the prison for those cases, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. (P D B J) 30.03.2026 dss 4/6

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Madurai NIB CID, Madurai.

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J dss

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 13216 of 2025 Date : 30.03.2026 6/6