Sunil Patel vs The State Rep. By
2026 Latest Caselaw 1787 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1787 Mad
Judgement Date : 10 April, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Sunil Patel vs The State Rep. By on 10 April, 2026

                                                                             CRL OP No. 9108 of 2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                  DATED: 10-04-2026
                                                       CORAM
                                   THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
                                                CRL OP No. 9108 of 2026
                1. Sunil Patel
                2. Gananatha Padhana
                                                                                    ..Petitioners
                                                          Vs
                The State Rep. By
                The Inspector of Police,
                Tiruppur Central Police Station,
                Tiruppur District.
                Crime No.77 of 2026
                                                                                   ..Respondent



                Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 483 of BNSS Act to
                enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in Crime No.77 of 2026 on
                the file of the Inspector of Police, Tiruppur Central Police Station, Tiruppur.


                              For Petitioner:          Mr.P. Thinesh

                              For Respondent:          Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar
                                                       Government Advocate (Crl.Side)


                                                       ORDER

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

14.03.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 8(c) r/w. 20(b)(ii)(B), 25 and

29(1) of NDPS Act in Crime No.2/2026/AC/CB on the file of the respondent

police, seek bail.

__________ Page1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners were found in

possession of 5 kg of ganja. Hence, this case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the

petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and that they have

not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted

that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be

imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioners.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and

submitted that there are two accused. Total recovery of contraband is 5 kg of

ganja, which is an intermediate quantity and the petitioners are incarcerated

since 14.03.2026. He also fairly submitted that the petitioners have no previous

case pending against them. However, he opposed the grant of bail to the

Petitioners.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and

perused the materials available on record.

6. From the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and

taking into consideration of the above aspect and upon the fact that the quantity

__________ Page2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

involved is an intermediate quantity and the duration of incarceration of the

petitioners since 14.03.2026, this Court is of the view that as it involves only

intermediate quantity of ganja, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners

on bail subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their

executing a separate 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 Judicial Magistrate No.2, Tiruppur, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. and 05.30 p.m, for a period of sixty days and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in accordance with

__________ Page3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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)13 SCC 283];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

10-04-2026 SHL

Note:

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

2. All 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: