Pandi vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2467 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2467 Mad
Judgement Date : 13 May, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Pandi vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ... on 13 May, 2026

                                                                     CRL OP(MD). No.9404 of 2026


                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                            Dated : 13/05/2026

                                                    CORAM

                           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN

                                        CRL OP(MD). No.9404 of 2026

                     Pandi                           ... Petitioner/Accused No.2

                                                     Vs

                     State of Tamilnadu Rep by,
                     The Inspector of Police,
                     Parthibanoor Police Station,
                     Ramanathapuram District.
                     (Crime No. 67/2026).             ... Respondent/Complainant

                     PRAYER :-

                          For Bail in Crime No.67/2026 on the file of the respondent
                     police.


                       For Petitioner : Mr.Ramesh. M,
                                        Advocate.
                       For Respondent : Mr.S.Ravi,
                                        Additional Public Prosecutor


                     ORDER :

The Court made the following order :-

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

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody

on 10.04.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) & 20(b)

(ii)(B) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.67 of 2026 on the file of the

respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.04.2026, at about

06.00 p.m, when the respondent police were in routine surveillance near

Graveyard, Arunkulam, Parthibanoor, on seeing the police party, two

persons tried to escape from the scene of occurrence. However, the

respondent police nabbed them and on search, they were found in illegal

possession of 2.500 kg of ganja. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as

alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is in

judicial custody from 10.04.2026. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the

petitioner and another accused were found in illegal possession of 2.500

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

kg of ganja and the offence is grave in nature and the investigation is at a

preliminary stage and the petitioner has 8 previous cases. Hence, he

strongly opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. By way of reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner would

submit that all the cases are false cases and the same have been registered

for statistical purpose only and this case also registered against the

petitioner without any recovery from him.

6. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the

case and also considering the fact that the quantity involved in this case

is not a commercial quantity and no recovery was made from this

petitioner and the entire contraband was only recovered from A1 and also

considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this

Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following

conditions:

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

executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only)

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

each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the

Additional District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court

for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Pudukottai, and on further conditions

that :-

[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their

photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond

and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card

or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the

respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further

orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence

or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during

investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the

learned 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

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

petitioner is 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];