Kalpana Rani vs The State Of Tamilnadu
2026 Latest Caselaw 1988 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1988 Mad
Judgement Date : 17 April, 2026

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Kalpana Rani vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 17 April, 2026

                                                                     CRL OP(MD). No.3316 of 2026



                         BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                           ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

                                              Date    : 17.04.2026

                                                      PRESENT

                                   THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

                                          CRL OP(MD). No.3316 of 2026


                     Kalpana Rani
                                                     ...Petitioner/Accused No.4
                                                         Vs

                     State of Tamil Nadu rep. by
                     The Inspector of Police,
                     Vettaikaraniruppu Police Station,
                     Nagapattinam District.
                     (Crime No.10 of 2026)
                                           ...Respondent/Complainant

                                  For Petitioner : Mr.V.Chandrapandi
                                  For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan
                                                  Additional Public Prosecutor

                          PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS
                     PRAYER :-   For Bail in Cr.No. 10 of 2026 on the
                     file of the respondent police.

                     ORDER :

The Court made the following order :-

The petitioner /A4, who was arrested and

remanded to judicial custody on 13.01.2026 for

the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985, in

Crime No.10 of 2026 on the file of the respondent

police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on

09.01.2025 at about 18.50 hours, the defacto

complainant/police official received the secret

information regarding the transportation of Ganja

in grey colour innova car bearing Registration

No.TN 19 R 0007 near Nagapattinam to Vethranayam

at Puthupalli Bridge. Thereafter, the respondent

Police arrived at the alleged occurrence and

tried to stop the car and the said car was not

stopped and rushed in a rash and negligent manner

and the Police officials followed the said car

and the said car skit and down the irrigation.

Thereafter, the respondent Police found that the

petitioner and other accused person were in

illegal possession of 219.770 kgs of Ganja.

Hence, the case.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner

would contend that the respondent police have

registered a false case against the petitioner

for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c)

r/w 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act, 1985.

The petitioner is an innocent and she is nothing

to do with the alleged offences. He would further

contend that no contraband was recovered from the

petitioner and based on the confession of co-

accused, she has been arrayed as A4. She is in

judicial custody from 13.01.2026. Therefore

prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor

appearing for the respondent would submit that

the accused was found in illegal possession of

219.770 of Ganja. He would further submit that

the petitioner has no previous cases. He would

further submit that the investigation is still

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

pending and hence, he strongly opposed to grant

bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused

the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by

the learned counsel on either side, nature of

offence, though the prosecution stated that the

contraband involved in this case is a commercial

quantity, the entire contraband were recovered

from the other accused and no contraband was

recovered from the petitioner and based on the

confession of co-accused, she has been arrayed as

A4 and the petitioner has no previous cases and

the co-accused were already released on bail and

also considering the period of incarceration

undergone by the petitioner from 13.01.2026, this

Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner

subject to the following conditions:

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

[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 Additional

District Judge/Presiding Officer, Special

Court under Essential Commodities Act,

Thanjavur, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before

the learned Additional District

Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court

under Essential Commodities Act,

Thanjavur, on all working days at 10.30

a.m., until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit

any offence similar to the offence of

which she is accused, or suspected, or of

the commission of which she is suspected;

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

[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].