Manikandan v. The State Through, the Inspector of Police,

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

07.11.2025, for the offence under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(c) and 29(1) and 25 of NDPS Act, 1985 in Crime No.160 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 07.11.2025 at about 2.00 hours the respondent police received information regarding illegal sale of contraband. Hence they proceeded to the scene of occurrence and intercepted the alleged vehicle and found that the petitioner along with other accused were found in possess of 33.082 kgs of ganja. Hence the accused were arrested and confession statements were recorded in the present of witnessess and contraband along with vehicle was seized under a seizure mahazar. Hence, the case. Page2 of 6

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner herein arrayed as A8 and he was found in possession of 4 kgs of ganja and he was not aware of the possession of contraband by other accused. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 07.11.2025 and prays to grant bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are totally nine accused in this case and the petitioner/A8 is the main accused and he involved in packing the contraband and transporting to other places. He further submitted that the petitioner is aware of the possession of the contraband by the other accused. He further submitted that each of the accused were carrying the contraband separately and they were in the assumption that separate search and seizure was done. He further submitted that all the mandatory provisions were duly followed and thereafter only they have seized the contraband. Hence, opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶5I have gone through the statement recorded from the arrested accused which reveals that this petitioner/A8 contacted A1 in this case for the sale of contraband and on 04.11.2025 and 05.11.2025 there was a monetary transaction Page3 of 6 between this petitioner/A8 and A1. It is also seen that this petitioner helped A1 to traffik the Contraband in Tamil Nadu.

¶6Considering the submissions made by both sides and the fact that the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity and the petitioner has not satisfied the twin conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 29-01-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SMN Page4 of 6 To

¶1The Inspector of Police, Vadavanakkambadi Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶2The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras Page5 of 6 CRLoOPoNo.o380oofo2026 K.RAJASEKAR,oJ. smn CRLoOPoNo.o380oofo2026 29-01-2026 Page6oofo6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 29-01-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Manikandan S/o.Jayakumar, No.71, Middle Street, Madhur Village and Post, Viruthachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Through, The Inspector of Police, Vadavanakkambadi Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. Cr.No.160 of 2025. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.160 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent Police. Page1 of 6 For Petitioner(s): Mr.D.Bharathy For Respondent(s): MR.A. Gopinath, Govt Advocate