IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-01-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Chandra Kumar, S/o.Ulaganathan No.4/14, Devar Street, Palayakaayal, Thoothukudi ..Petitioner(s)

Vs State rep by the Inspector of Police, PEW, Pallikaranai Unit.

Cr.No.267 of 2024 ..Respondent(s)

PRAYER Criminal Revision Case filed under Sec. 438 r/w 442 of B.N.S.S.,2023, to call for the records and set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.5381 of 2025 dated 30.09.2025 in CC.No.516 of 2025 on the file of the II Additional Special Judge under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai in the interest of justice.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Karthikeyan for Mr.K.Subburaj For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Vinothraja, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

Order

The petition challenges the order refusing to enlarge the petitioner, who is arrayed as A3 in Crime No.267 of 2024 on statutory bail.

2. The respondent arrested the petitioner on 28.10.2024 on the accusation that the petitioner along with other accused were found in possession of 150 kgs. of ganja. The respondent ought to have filed the final report on or before 17.04.2025. They filed a petition seeking extension of time under Proviso to Sec. 36(A)(4) of NDPS Act. The said petition was allowed by the learned Special Judge in Crl.M.P.No. 1854 of 2025 by an order dated 17.04.2025 extended the time by 90 days. The respondent thereafter filed a final report on

05.06.2025, within the time extended by the learned Judge.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition seeking statutory bail on

16.06.2025 stating that the charge sheet filed by the respondent on 05.06.2025 was returned; that therefore, it has to be construed that no final report was filed on that day; and that the respondent had filed the final report only on

18.06.2025.

4. The learned judge dismissed the said petition on the ground that the final report was filed and cognizance was taken within the time granted by the court.

5. The learned counsel for petitioner would submit that the final report filed by the respondent was defective; and that since only the defective final report was filed within the time stipulated by the court, the petitioner is entitled for statutory bail.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor, per contra, submitted that three months time was granted to the respondent by an order dated 17.04.2025; that even assuming that the defective final report was filed on 05.06.2025, the said defect was rectified; that the learned judge has taken cognizance of the offence on 18.06.2025 and the case was taken on file in C.C.No. 516 of 2025; and that considering the said fact the impugned order dismissing petition seeking for statutory bail cannot be faulted and prayed for dismissal of the revision.

7. Admittedly, the learned judge had granted extension of time under Sec.36(A)(4) of NDPS Act by an order dated 17.04.2025. The respondent had time to file the final report till 15.07.2025. The Revision challenging the said extension in Crl.R.C.No.1332 of 2025 filed by the petitioner before this Court was dismissed. Though the final report was initially filed on 05.06.2025 and returned, the returns were complied with and the learned judge took cognizance of the final report on 18.06.2025. The learned judge had also observed that there is no defect in the final report.

8. From the aforesaid facts, it is clear that the respondent had filed the final report within the time stipulated. Therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to statutory bail. Hence, this court is of the view that there is no infirmity in the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.5381 of 2025 in C.C.No. 516 of 2025 by the learned II Additional Special Judge under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is dismissed.

08-01-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RPP To

1. The II Additional Special Judge under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai

2. The Inspector of Police, PEW, Pallikaranai Unit.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

SUNDER MOHAN J.

RPP

08-01-2026