← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/20568/2025granted

Mohankumar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Nib - Cid Trichy Unit,

2026-04-30Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 30.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No.20568 of 2025 Mohankumar ... Petitioner/Accused No.4 Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, NIB-CID Trichy Unit, Trichy.

(Crime NO.4 of 2024) ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- To enlarge the petitioner/4h Accused on bail in C.C.No.122 of 2024 pending on the file of the Additional District Judge for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukottai.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kasirajan, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to 1/6

judicial custody on 14.02.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(i) of NDPS Act, in Crime No. 4 of 2024 on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 14.02.2024, at about 05.00 a.m, on secret information that a few persons were trafficking Ganja in the secret chamber of the six wheeled truck and being escorted by two other persons in Chennai to Trichy National Highway, near Irungallur check post, the respondent went to the occurrence place and intercepted a six wheeled truck bearing Reg.No.TN-04-AY-8167 and found 140 kg of ganja in the secret chamber of the top cabin of the vehicle. 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 this is the second bail petition and the earlier petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court and no recovery was made from the petitioner and the contraband was recovered 2/6

from the lorry and the petitioner is only the cleaner of the vehicle and no previous case is pending against him and he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.02.2024. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner and the other accused were found in possession of 140 kg of ganja and the quantity involved in this case is a commercial quantity and the offence is grave in nature and this is the second bail petition and the earlier petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by this Court and now, there are no change of circumstance. Hence, he 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, nature of offence, and though the quantity involved in this 3/6

case is a commercial quantity, the contraband was recovered from the lorry in which the petitioner was travelled as cleaner and even according to the prosecution, the contraband was transported by other accused not by the petitioner herein and the allegations against the petitioner is that he travelled in the lorry but he travelled only as cleaner of the vehicle and no previous case is pending against him and also considering the age and period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [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 Additional District Judge for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukottai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the trial Court daily at 10.30 a.m., and 05.00 p.m, until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make 4/6

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].

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

(P D B J) 30.04.2026 dss 5/6

P. DHANABAL,J DSS To 1.The Additional District Judge for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukottai. 2.The Inspector of Police, NIB-CID Trichy Unit, Trichy.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.20568 of 2025 Date : 30.04.2026 6/6