S.R.Aejaz Ahmed v. Union Of India

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL S.R.Aejaz Ahmed

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs The Union of India Through Intelligence Officer Chennai Zonal Unit Madurai Camp F.No.48/1/5/2025/NCB/MDS

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Arul Jenifer For Respondent : Mr.C.Arul Vadivel @ Sekar Special Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in F.No.48/1/5/2025/NCB/MDS on the file of the respondent police.

1/5

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / A2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.02.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c)r/w. 20(b)(ii)(C),28 and 29 of NDPS Act in F.No.48/1/5/2025/NCB/MDS on the file of the respondent seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused were found in illegal possession of 16kgs of Hashish Oil. 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. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.02.2025. He would further submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that petitioner along with other accused were found in illegal possession of 16kgs of Hashish Oil which is a commercial quantity and the 2/5

same was recovered from this petitioner. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

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 also considering the nature of offences and the quantity involved in this case is a commercial quantity and though the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied judgments in respect of ground of arrest and according to him grounds of arrest have not been furnished to the accused but the arrest memo reveals the ground of arrest and if any discrepancies it can be tested during trial and at this stage bail cannot be granted to the petitioner. Further the petitioner also failed to satisfy the twin test as contemplated under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Hence the petition stands dismissed.

(P D B J) 3/5

15.04.2026 aav To

1. The Union of India Through Intelligence Officer Chennai Zonal Unit Madurai Camp 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 15810 of 2025 Date : 15.04.2026 5/5