SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 18870

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.Kumarappan, J
Surya – Appellant
Versus
The State rep. By The Inspector of Police, E-5, Sholavaram Police Station – Respondent
Crime No.9 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.P.Santhosh
For the Respondents:Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

The court emphasized the risk of misusing bail due to the petitioner's extensive criminal history.

Headnote:This judgment discusses the petition for bail under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, concerning Crime No.9 of 2026 where the petitioner was arrested for possession of Ganja. The court highlighted the petitioner's prior criminal record and concerns of misusing bail. The court found that given these factors, bail was denied, ultimately dismissing the Criminal Original Petition.

Table of Content
1. fact of arrest and alleged offence. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments for and against bail. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's consideration of past offenses. (Para 5 , 6)

ORDER

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

07.01.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c) r/w Section 20(b)(ii)(B) and 29(1) of the NDPS Act, in Crime No. 9 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner was found in possession of 1.20 Kgs of Ganja. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and that the contraband seized is of commercial quantity. He would further submit that the petitioner has been in custody since 07.01.2026 and therefore prayed for the grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent, while opposing the grant of bail to the petitioner, submitted that there are 29 previous cases, including one murder case, pending against the petitioner. It was further submitted that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of the petitioner misusing the liberty granted by this Court.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. Though the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 07.01.2026, as rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), there is every possibility of the petitioner misusing the liberty granted by this Court if enlarged on bail. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top