Arunkumar @ Babli v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Pappanadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Arunkumar @ Babli

...Petitioner/Accused No.2

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Pappanadu Police Station, Thanjavur District.

(Crime No.416 of 2024)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.R.L.Dhilipan Pandian for R.Ilayaraja For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- to grant bail for the petitioner/accused in C.C.No.82 of 2025 on the file of the learned Additional District 1/8

Judge/Presiding Officer Special Court of E.C.Act Cases, Thanjavur, in Crime No.416 of 2024 on the file of the respondent.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / A2, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.02.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(2)(a) of NDPS, Act, 1985, in Crime No.416 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused were in illegal possession of 128.397 kgs of Ganja. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent 2/8

Police registered a case against the petitioner and others. He would further submit that only based on the confession of co-accused, the petitioner has been arrayed as A2. He would further submit that no contraband was recovered from this petitioner. Even as per the prosecution, the contraband was seized only from the other accused and hence, the petitioner has not in conscious possession of contraband. Hence, he prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that on the date of occurrence, all the accused were intercepted by the respondent Police together and they travelled together in a car. He would further submit that all the accused have been in conscious possession of the contraband and hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. However, he would further submit that 3/8

no previous case is pending against 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, nature of offence, and only based on the confession of coaccused, the petitioner has been arrayed as accused and the contraband was not recovered from this petitioner, per contra entire contraband was recovered from other accused, the petitioner has no previous case for a similar kind of offence and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

4/8

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court of E.C.Act Cases, Thanjavur, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court of E.C.Act Cases, Thanjavur, on all working days Morning at 10.30 a.m., and Evening at 05.00 p.m., until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which she is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond 5/8

either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

6/8

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 06.04.2026 vsg To 1.The learned Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court of E.C.Act Cases, Thanjavur.

2.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy.

3.The Inspector of Police, Pappanadu Police Station, Thanjavur District.

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

7/8

P. DHANABAL, J., vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 20024 of 2025 Date : 06.04.2026 8/8