Muthulakshmi v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Cumbum North

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.03.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN CRL OP(MD)No.18990 of 2025 Muthulakshmi ... Petitioner/ Accused No.3 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by The Inspector of Police, Cumbum North Police Station, Theni District.

(Crime No.140 of 2025) ... Respondent/ Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.A.Thiyagarajan For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.140 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. 1/5

ORDER : The Court makes the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8 (c) r/w 20(b) (ii) (C) & 29(1) of NDPS Act, in Crime No. 140 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.06.2025, at about 05.10 hours, the defacto complainant along with his police party were reached the spot and raided at New Bus Stand Cumbum to Kamayakavundanpatti Road nearby St.Mary's School backside and at that time, the petitioner along with other accused were found possession of 22 kgs of ganja. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that there was no material evidence available against the petitioner to show the involvement of the crime and also a false case has been registered against the petitioner. He further submitted that the respondent has seized only 8 kgs of ganja from this petitioner, which is small quantity. He further 2/5

submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 09.06.2025 now the investigation has been completed and final report has been filed. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner and other accused persons jointly assembled together and possession of different quantity of ganja. Apart from that the petitioner has five previous cases similar in nature two cases involves in commercial quantity under the NDPS Act. In view of the above circumstances, he sought to dismiss the bail petition.

5. This Court heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds that the petitioner has also five previous cases, including two cases involving commercial quantity under the NDPS Act and has also failed to satisfy the requirements under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 3/5

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. (K K R K J) 10.03.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No ebsi To

1. The Inspector of Police, Cumbum North Police Station, Theni District.

2. The Special Court for EC and NDPS Court Cases, Madurai.

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

4/5

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

ebsi Order made in Crl.O.P(MD)No.18990 of 2025 10.03.2026 5/5