Rohith Thangaraj v. Union Of India

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 07.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Rohith Thangaraj

...Petitioner/Accused No.2

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Junior Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal Unit.

(F.No.48/1/4/2025/NCB/MDS)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.Lamech Indian For Respondent : Mr.C.Arul Vadivel @ Sekar Special Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in F.No.48/1/4/2025/NCB/MDS on the file of the respondent/Junior Intelligence Officer .

1/6

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner /A2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.02.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 28 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985, in F.No.48/1/4/2025/NCB/MDS on the file of the respondent/Junior Intelligence Officer, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 13.02.2025, the respondent officer proceeded to surveillance near Uma Auto Garage, mayan Nagar, Madurai Usilampatti Road, at that time, they intercepted the petitioner and other accused persons, who came out from the car bearing Registration No.MH 14 KW 9055 and found that the petitioner and other accused person were in illegal possession of 156 kgs of Ganja in. Hence, the case.

2/6

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the respondent officers have registered a false case against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 28 and 29 of NDPS Act, 1985. The petitioner is an innocent and he is nothing to do with the alleged offences. He is in judicial custody from 14.02.2025. Therefore prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent officer would submit that the accused persons were found in illegal possession of 156 kgs of Ganja. He would further submit that the petitioner has previous case. He would further submit that the investigation is still pending and 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 on either side, considering the fact that the quantity of contraband involved in this case is a commercial quantity and he has previous case and further the petitioner has not satisfied the twin condition as per Section 37 of the NDPS Act, hence, this Court is declined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7.

Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

(P D B J) 07.04.2026 vsg 4/6

To 1.The Junior Intelligence Officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal Unit.

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J., vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 17850 of 2025 Date : 07.04.2026 6/6