Balamurugan v. The State Rep by

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

03.04.2026 for the alleged offences under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(c) and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985 in Cr. No.75 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. Page2 of 4

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on secret information, while the respondent police conducted vehicle checkup near Katpadi to chittoor Road, Christiyanpet Check Post near Information Board at Tamil Nadu State Border on 02.04.2026 at about 19.30 hours, found A1 to A8, who were standing in a suspicious manner and on enquiry and search, 50 kilograms of Ganja was recovered from the accused. The respondent police secured the accused and seized the contraband and properties. Hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are about 9 accused and this petitioner is A4. He would further submit that according to the prosecution, the petitioner is A5. It is the further contention of the learned counsel that the petitioner is the driver in one Kaveri Call Taxi, where the other accused took a car on hire and when the petitioner was driving the car along with other accused, the police intercepted and effected recovery of 50 kgs of Ganja. The learned counsel would further submit that there is no nexus with other accused and the petitioner, being a driver, has been wrongly roped into this case and hence prayed to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶4However, the said contention has been objected by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police and he would submit that the investigation is at preliminary stage as the FIR came to be registered on 02.04.2026. Therefore, he strongly objected the bail application. Page3 of 4

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

¶6From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate, this Court could able to see that the investigation is at preliminary stage and since the recovery of 50 grams of Ganja is a commercial quantity, the rigors under Section 37 of NDPS act would attract. Therefore, this Court is of the firm view that it is not an appropriate stage to consider the submissions made by the petitioner.

¶7Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 04-06-2026 MJS 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. Page4 of 4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. MJS To

¶1The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶2The Inspector of Police, Katpadi Police Station, Vellore District. 04-06-2026

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 04-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Balamurugan S/o Magendiran No.32, Karumariyamman Kovil Street, Vepedu, Kanchipuram Taluk, Kanchipuram District ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State represented by: The Inspector of Police, Katpadi Police Station, Vellore District [Cr. No.75/2026] ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: The Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Cr. No.75/2026 on the file of respondent Police. For Petitioner(s): M/S. C.Harish For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar, Government Advocate (Criminal side)