Sathishwaran @ Satheeswaran v. The State of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20/07/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Sathishwaran @ Satheeswaran, S/o.Ramanathan, No.3/58, Velaiyarvadi, Vedhalai, Mandapam, Ramanathapuram.. ... Petitioner/Accused No.4 Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station, Ramanathapuram. Cr.No.100 of 2025.. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.K.Subburaj, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar, Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-32B.To enlarge the petitioner on bail in C.C.No.26 of 2026 in Cr.No.100 of 2025 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Special Court under EC and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai and to pass such other order or direction as this.. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused No.4, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 16.05.2025 for the alleged offence under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act, 1985 in C.C.No.26 of 2026 in Cr.No. 100 of 2025 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Special Court under EC and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukkottai, in connection with Crime No.100 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that on prior information, the respondent Police conducted surveillance at Ariyaman Beach on

07.05.2025 at about 23.00 hours, during the surveillance, they had seen two persons carrying white sacks. The said persons approached a country boat, placed the sacks inside the boat and fled from the scene. Immediately, the police party intervened. On seeing the police, the person, who was in the boat also escaped. Thereafter, the police searched the sacks found in the boat and on verification, found that they contained 32 kilograms of Ganja, which was seized under a mahazar. Thereafter, the respondent Police conducted an investigation and filed the final report. During the course of the investigation, it was revealed that A1 to A4 conspired together to transport Ganja. It was further revealed that they had initially buried the contraband near Vedalay North Beach, Vaigai Nagar, near the Railway Gate. On the next day, i.e., on

08.05.2025, as per the instructions of A1, A2 and A3 brought the Ganja to Ariyaman Beach for the purpose of handing it over. At that time, the respondent Police intervened and seized the contraband. Based on the confession statements of some of the co-accused and the materials collected during the investigation, the petitioner was arrayed as an accused in the case and was subsequently arrested.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the similarly placed accused, who are ranked as A2, A3 and A5 have already been granted bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD).Nos.10748, 11574 and 7352 of 2026 by this Court under various dates. The petitioner is ready to cooperate with the trial process. He further submitted that except the confession, no recovery has been made from the petitioner and no incriminating material is available against him. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned counsel for the State of TN (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the co-accused were released on bail on the ground that there is no recovery effected from them and the other accused were arrayed as accused only based on the confession statement given by the co-accused. He further submitted that the petitioner is alleged to have been involved in the possession and transportation of a commercial quantity of ganja. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5.I have carefully considered the submissions made on either side and also perused the materials available on records. I have also perused the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.7352 of 2026, dated

09.06.2026, wherein this Court observed as follows:

6.Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, on the basis of the confession statement only this petitioner has been arrayed as an accused, though the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity, no contraband was recovered from this petitioner, it was only recovered from the main accused, investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed before the concerned Court, though the prosecution has stated that the petitioner has one previous case, it was also registered on the same day and in that case also he was implicated on the basis of the confession statement of the co-accused, and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

6.This Court has also perused the final report and the confession statements recorded from the co-accused. Except for the said confession statements, no material has been produced to implicate the petitioner in the alleged offence. In the absence of any sufficient material connecting the petitioner with the crime and considering the fact that the similarly placed co-accused have already been released on bail, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is also entitled to the grant of bail.

7.Considering the reasons stated above and the same is squarely applicable to the present petitioner, 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.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Special Court under EC and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukottai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Special Court under EC and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukottai, on all working days at 10.30 a.m., for a period of six weeks. [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.

(K R S J)

20.07.2026 VSG TO

1.The learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Special Court under EC and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukottai.

2.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Pudukkottai.

3.The Inspector of Police, Uchipuli Police Station, Ramanathapuram.

¶4The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. K. RAJASEKAR,J., vsg ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.13883 of 2026 Date : 20/07/2026