Rajkumar v. The State Represented By, Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B), 25, 29(1) of NDPS Act 1985 in connection with the Cr. No.808 of 2025 of 2025, seeks Page2 of 4 anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that, based on secret information, the respondent police proceeded to the scene of the occurrence. Upon noticing the police party, the accused persons attempted to flee but were successfully apprehended 3 persons and the petitioner escaped from the scene of occurrence. A subsequent search and seizure revealed that the petitioner, along with other accused persons, was in illegal possession of 3 kg 200 grams of ganja. Consequently, the present case was registered against them.

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner innocent person, and he has been falsely implicated by the respondent police. He further submitted that petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation and he is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution's case and submitted that there are four accused involved in the present offence, and the petitioner has been arrayed as A4. She further clarified that although the petitioner was identified as 'Sunil' in the FIR, his actual name is Raj Kumar. It was contended that the alleged contraband was recovered from the accused persons and that the Page3 of 4 petitioner had initially fled from the scene of occurrence. Pointing out that the petitioner has one previous case similar in nature pending against him, the Government Advocate vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail."

¶5Having considered the gravity of the offence, the petitioner's conduct in escaping from the scene of occurrence, and his previous criminal antecedent involving a similar offence and it is a case of seizure of ganja, I am not inclined to grant the relief of anticipatory bail sought for by the petitioner.

¶6Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 29-01-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order JAI To

¶1The Inspector of police M-5 Ennore Police Station, Chennai.

¶2The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o1902oofo2026 K.RAJASEKAR,oJ. JAI CRLoOPoNo.o1902oofo2026 29-01-2026 Page4oofo4

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 29-01-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Rajkumar ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State represented by, Inspector of police M-5 Ennore Police Station, Chennai. Crime No. 808 of 2025. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest by the Respondent Police pending investigation in Crime No. 808 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Vijayakumar For Respondent(s): Ms.J.R.Archana, GA (Crl.side)[