Purusothamman v. The State Rep by the Inspector of Police

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

08.03.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C) & 29(1) of NDPS Ac in Crime No.74 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. Page2 of 4

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused were found to be in possession of 21.500 kg of ganja. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been incarcerated since 08.03.2025 that there are about 4 accused and the petitioner has been arrayed as A4. The total recovery is 21.5 kg of ganja. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that since charge sheet has been filed and the petitioner has been incarcerated since 08.03.2025, further custody of the petitioner is not required. Hence, prayed to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶4The said contention was strongly opposed by the learned Government counsel (Crl.Side) and submitted that this case being a commercial quantity and the recovery is from all the accused jointly. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has contented that the there is a delay in trial now that the case has been posted for furnishing of copies. Therefore, the mere delay will not be a ground to overcome the rigour under section 37 of NDPS Act. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner.

¶5I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record. Page3 of 4

¶6Considering the facts and circumstances of the case; taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side); admittedly, this is a case of commercial quantity and according to prosecution, this is a joint recovery and now the case has been posted for furnishing of copies. The mere delay in trial cannot be considered as a ground to overcome the rigour under Section 37 of NDPS Act. Hence, this Court could not find any material to overcome the rigour under section 37 of NDPS Act and is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶7Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 29-07-2026 SHL To:

¶1The Inspector of Police J-3, Guindy Police Station, Chennai.

¶2The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras CRLoOPoNo.o20467oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPANoJ. SHL CRLoOPoNo.o20467oofo2026 29-07-2026 Page4oofo4

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 29-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Purusothamman ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep by The Inspector of Police J-3, Guindy Police Station, Chennai. Crime No.74 of 2025. ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge this petitioner on bail concerned in C.C.No.860 of 2025 pending on the file of this Court. For Petitioner: Mr.N.Arun Kumar For Respondent: Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side)