Prakash Raj v. The State Rep By, the Inspector of Police

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and CRL OP No. 5758 of 2026 Prakash Raj Sasi Kumar @ Maandi ..Petitioner in Crl.OP.No.5751 of 2026 ..Petitioner in Crl.OP.No.5758 of 2026 Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police H-8, Thiruvottiyur Police Station, (Crime No. 736 of 2025) ..Respondent in both Crl.Ops. Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 483 of BNS Act to enlarge the petitioner/accused on bail in CC.No.1049 of 2025 pending on the file of II Additional Special Court under EC and NDPS act at Chennai in Crime NO.736 of 2025 dated on 16.05.2025 pending on the file of Respondent Police. For Petitioners: R.Dinesh For Respondent: Mr. Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl Side) Page2 of 5 COMMON ORDER The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

16.05.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985 in Crime No.736 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that petitioners were found in possession of 25 kgs of ganja. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that according to the prosecution, there was recovery of 25 kgs of ganja from the petitioners and the petitioners have been incarcerated since 16.05.2025. This is the 2nd bail application and the trial proceeded at a snail's pace. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioners.

¶4Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner was totally objected by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side). Further, he relied on the order of this Court dated 04.02.2026 wherein as against these petitioners bail was denied and Page3 of 5 there are no change in circumstances. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioners.

¶5I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record.

¶6From the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, it is rightly contended by the learned Govt Advocate (Crl.Side) that there are no change in circumstances from the earlier disposal order dated 04.02.2026. No doubt, the petitioners have been incarcerated since 16.05.2025, however, as per the quantity of contraband recovered from the petitioner, the case comes under the commercial quantity case. Therefore, in order to overcome the rigour of section 37(1)(b)(ii) of NDPS Act, there are no materials available in the petition as well as in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. This Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 24-03-2026 SHL Page4 of 5 To:

¶1The II Additional Special Court under EC and NDPS act at Chennai

¶2The Inspector of Police H-8, Thiruvottiyur Police Station.

¶3The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras CRLoOPoNo.o5751oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPANoJ. SHL CRLoOPoNo.o5751oofo2026 and CRLoOPoNo.o5758oofo2026 24-03-2026 Page5oofo5