Mokireddy Venkateshwara Rao @ Venkatesh v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Mokireddy Venkateshwara rao @ Venkatesh

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Gudalur North Police Station, Theni.

(Crime No. 225 of 2024)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Manoj Kumar Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 225 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police. 1/5

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 16.02.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1), 27A and 25 of NDPS Act, 1985 in Crime No. 225 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 28.10.2024, A1 to A3 were in illegal joint possession of 1.100 kg of contraband and based on the confession of the co-accused, the petitioner has been arrayed as A6. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is an unnamed accused and based on the confession of co-accused, the petitioner has been arrayed as A6. He would further submit that co-accused was arrested and released on bail. He would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 16.02.2025. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the 2/5

petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would admit that based on the confession of co-accused, the petitioner has been arrayed as A6. He would however submit that the quantity of contraband involved is commercial quantity and this is the third bail application and there is no change in circumstances. He would further submit that the investigation is pending the offences are grave in nature and hence, he strongly 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 considering the facts that the quantity of contraband involved in this case is commercial quantity and there is no change in circumstances and also there is no ground to fulfil the conditions under Section 37 of NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

3/5

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. (P D B J) 30.03.2026 apd To 1.The Inspector of Police, Gudalur North Police Station, Theni.

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J apd

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 19332 of 2025 Date : 30.03.2026 5/5