T.Sakthivel v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL T.Sakthivel

...Petitioner/Accused No.1

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, NIB-CID Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.04 of 2003)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Mani Maran For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- to grant bail for the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.19 of 2024 in the Special Principal District Judge for E.C and NDPS 1/8

Act Cases, Madurai, on the file of the respondent Police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 08.10.2024 for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.04 of 2003 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused were in illegal possession of 60 kgs of ganja. Hence the case.

3. It is not in dispute that since the petitioner has not turned up for the hearing, Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) was ordered to be issued on 05.02.2016 and the same was executed on 08.10.2024 and he is still in judicial custody. 2/8

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that only based on the confession of coaccused, the petitioner has been arrayed as A1. He is in judicial custody from 19.03.2025. He would further submit that the mother case in C.C.No.1063 of 2003 was disposed of by acquitting the main accused. Therefore prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that due to non-appearance, the Non-Bailable Warrant was issued against the petitioner. He would further submit that the contraband involved is a commercial quantity and the petitioner has eight previous cases, which are registered under IPC. 3/8

Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and considering the fact that already the petitioner was granted bail and thereafter, due to non-appearance, NBW was issued and the mother case in C.C.No.1063 of 2003 was disposed of by acquitting the main accused and only based on the confession of co-accused, the petitioner has been arrayed as A1 and though eight previous cases are pending against the petitioner, the same are not similar kind of offence and in all cases, the petitioner was granted bail and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to 4/8

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 Special District Judge for E.C & NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Special District Judge for E.C & NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, on all working days Morning at 10.30 a.m., and Evening at 05.00 p.m., until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is 5/8

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 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 6/8

SCW 5560].

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

(P D B J) 06.04.2026 vsg To 1.The learned Special District Judge for E.C & NDPS Act Cases, Madurai.

2.The Superintendent, District Prison, Dindigul.

3.The Inspector of Police, NIB-CID Police Station, Dindigul 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. 15304 of 2025 Date : 06.04.2026 8/8