Ajith Alias Sunathan v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06/04/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Ajith Alias Sunathan, S/o.Velautham ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep.By, The Sub Inspector of Police, Eruvadi Police Station, Tirunelveli.

in Cr.No.82 of 2025.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.R.L.Dhilipan Pandian For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- To enlarge the Petitioner/4th Accused on bail in C.C.No. 357/2025 on the file of the learned Principal Special Judge, EC and NDPS Court No.I, Madurai.

1/5

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985 in C.C.No. 357/2025 on the file of the Principal Special Judge, EC and NDPS Court No.I, Madurai in Crime No.82 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 28.02.2025, the petitioner and other accused were in illegal possession of 183 kgs of ganja. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.04.2025. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner. 2/5

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police fairly submits that on 28.02.2025, the petitioner and other accused were in illegal possession of 183 kgs of ganja and the petitioner has been arrayed as A4. He further submits that the petitioner has three previous cases, similar in nature and the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner and also considering the facts that he quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity and the petitioner has three previous cases, which are similar in nature, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. (P D B J) 06.04.2026 TTA 3/5

To 1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Eruvadi Police Station, Tirunelveli.

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL,J TTA

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.19067 of 2025 Date : 06/04/2026 5/5