F. Mohamed Ali vs State Rep By Inspector Of Police
2026 Latest Caselaw 1819 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1819 Mad
Judgement Date : 10 April, 2026

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

F. Mohamed Ali vs State Rep By Inspector Of Police on 10 April, 2026

                                                                            CRL OP No. 9097 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. 9097 of 2026
                F. Mohamed Ali
                                                                                    ..Petitioner
                                                          Vs
                State rep by
                The Inspector of Police
                Kuniamuthur Police Station,
                Coimbatore.
                (Crime.No.25/2026)
                                                                                  ..Respondent

                Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 483 of BNSS Act to
                enlarge the petitioner on bail with crime No.25 of 2026 on the file of the
                respondent police and pass such orders


                              For Petitioner:          Mr.G.Paramasivam

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


                                                       ORDER

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

23.01.2026 for the alleged offence under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(A), 29(1) of

Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act 1985 in Crime No.25 of 2026

on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

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

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other

person were found in possession of 200 grams of ganja. Hence, this case.

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

petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has not

committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that

the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed

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

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

appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and fairly

submitted that the petitioner was in possession of 200 grams of ganja which

comes under small quantity and the petitioner has one previous case pending

against him. However, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner.

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 quantity of contraband which is of small

quantity and the period of incarceration of the petitioner since 23.01.2026 and

upon the further fact that the co-accused has already been enlarged on bail in

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

Crl.OP.No.3676 of 2026 dated 16.02.2026, this Court is inclined to enlarge the

petitioner on bail subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his

executing 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

Judicial Magistrate Court No.7, Coimbatore, 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for the period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13

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

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.

10-04-2026 SHL

To: