Karthick @ Scissor Karthick v. The State Rep By, the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

02.02.2026 for the alleged offences under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29(1) of NDPS Act in Cr. No.57 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners along with other accused were found in illegal possession of 3 kgs of Ganja and hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they are under incarceration since

02.02.2026. He has also submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court and hence prayed for grant of bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and strongly opposed to enlarge the petitioners on bail on the ground that the 1st petitioner has 8 other previous cases and the 2nd petitioner has 5 other previous cases, which are serious in nature. Page3 of 5

¶5I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

¶6The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that this case is for the recovery of only 3 kgs of Ganja and the petitioners are under incarceration since 02.02.2026. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate would fairly submit that from each petitioner, 1.5 kgs of Ganja were recovered and though it is an intermediate quantity, the 1st petitioner has 8 other previous cases and the 2nd petitioner has 5 previous cases and all the said cases are serious in nature. While considering the list of cases pending against the petitioners, it is seen that the 2nd petitioner has one murder case among the five previous cases and the 1st petitioner has four theft cases and Arms Act cases. Therefore, considering the totality of circumstances, past conduct of the petitioners and taking into consideration of the allegations against these petitioners, this Court is of the firm view that, it is not appropriate stage to consider the bail application filed by the petitioners.

¶7Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 27-03-2026 MJS Page4 of 5 Note:

¶1Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

¶2All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code. To

¶1The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶2The Inspector of Police, H8 Thiruvottiyur Police Station, Chennai. CRLoOPoNo.o7801oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. MJS CRLoOPoNo.o7801oofo2026 27-03-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1. Karthick @ Scissor Karthick S/o Balasubramaniyam, No.46, Appar Nagar, 3rd Street, Thiruvottiyur, Chennai. 2. Karthick @ Kulla Karthick S/o Raji, No.46/50, Kalyanio Chettiyar Nagar, No.46, Appar Nagar, 3rd Street, Thiruvottiyur, Chennai. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State represented by: The Inspector of Police H8 Thiruvottiyur Police Station, Chennai. [Crime No.57 of 2026] ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: The Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. praying to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No.57 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s): Mr. A.Saranraj For Respondent(s): Mr. S. Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Criminal side) Page2 of 5