Jesuraja v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Nib - Cid

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 25/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Jesuraja, S/o.Chinnan, Pisankaraiputhur, Vadakadu, Oddanchathiram Taluk, Dindigul District.. ... Petitioner/Accused No.4 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, NIB - CID, Dindigul Police Station, Crime No.36/2021.. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.K.Muthu Ganesa Pandian, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-32B To release the petitioner on bail in CC No.405/2023 on the file of the 1st Addl Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai District and thus render justice. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused No.4, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

02.09.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), r/w. 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.36 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on the date of occurrence, the Sathurapatti Police was on patrol duty, at that time, the petitioner and other accused persons were in illegal possession of 50 kgs of Ganja. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. No contraband was recovered from this petitioner. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.09.2025 and Therefore, he prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The accused persons were in illegal possession of 50 kgs of Ganja. The contraband was recovered from A1 and A2 and no contraband was recovered from the petitioner. The petitioner has no previous cases. The quantity involved in this case also commercial quantity. Investigation has also been completed and the case is pending at the trial stage. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶5This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, though the prosecution has stated that the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity, no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and the entire contraband was recovered from A1 and A2 and the petitioner has no previous cases and the investigation has also been completed and the case is pending at the trial stage and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner from

02.09.2025, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned I Additional Special Court for NDPS Act Cases, Madurai District, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the learned I Additional Special Court for NDPS Act Cases, Madurai District on all working days, at 10.30 a.m., and 05.00 p.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions,

the

learned

Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS. (P D B J)

25.06.2026 VSG TO

1.The learned I Additional Special Court for NDPS Act Cases, Madurai District.

2.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai.

3.The Inspector of Police, NIB - CID, Dindigul Police Station,

¶4The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. CRLeOP(MD).eNo.8697eofe2026 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeP.eDHANABAL,J., eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeevsge eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeORDER eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeIN eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeCRLeOP(MD)eNo.8697eofe2026 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeDateee:e25/06/2026