Mohamed Arif v. State Rep By, Inspector of Police,

ORDER The petitioner/A9, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c), 22(a), 25, 29(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Page2 of 5 Substances Act, 1985, in Crime No.716 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The allegation against the petitioner/A9 is that the petitioner, along with other accused, had transported 2.5 grams of Methamphetamine illegally and the contraband was seized from the arrested accused by the respondent police. Hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner/A9 submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He also submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case based on the confession of the co-accused. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and the petitioner is ready to cooperate for the investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner has got three previous cases. Hence, he strongly opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Page3 of 5

¶5Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent.

¶6The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), for the respondent, strongly opposed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the petitioner has got three previous cases, and this is a case of recovery of 2.5 grams of Methamphetamine. Though 2.5 grams of Methamphetamine is an intermediate quantity, granting an anticipatory bail in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances case would set a wrong precedent, and apart from that, it will have an adverse effect in the society and the petitioner will also be emboldened to commit a similar offence in the future. Hence, this Court is of the firm view that the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

¶7Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 26-03-2026 dk Page4 of 5 Copy to:

¶1The Judge Special Court for EC Act Cases & NDPS Act Cases, Coimbatore.

¶2The Inspector of Police, Tiruppur South Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tiruppur District.

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.7702oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. DK CRLoOPoNo.o7702oofo2026 26-03-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 26-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Mohamed Arif, S/o.Mohammed Jaffer, 13, Swarnapuri Layout 1st Street, Kombai Thottam, Tiruppur District. ...Petitioner/A9 Vs State Rep by, Inspector of Police, Tiruppur South Police Station, Tiruppur City, Tiruppur District. Crime No.716/2025. ..Respondent/ Complainant Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner and order to enlarge him on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.716/2025 by the Respondent Police. For Petitioner: Mr.K.Sudhakar For Respondent: Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)