Ajith Surendhar Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1663202
CourtChennai High Court
Decided OnJul-02-2026
Case NumberCRL OP(MD)/13077/2026
JudgeHonourable Mr.Justice K.Rajasekar
AppellantAjith Surendhar
RespondentThe State of Tamilnadu Rep. by
Excerpt:
before the madurai bench of madras high court( criminal jurisdiction ) date : 02.07.2026 present the honourable mr. justice k. rajasekar crl op(md). no. 13077 of 2026 ajith surendhar ...petitioner vs state of tamil nadu rep. by the inspector of police, town west police station, dindigul district. (crime no.186 of 2026) ...respondent/complainant for petitioner : mr.s.sudhanthiran advocate for respondent : mr.t.lenin kumar counsel for state of tn (crl. side) petition for bail under sec.483 of bnss prayer :- for bail in cr.no. 186 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.order : the court made the following order :-the petitioner / accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.06.2026, for the offences punishable under section 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(b) of ndps act, in crime no.186 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.2. the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found inpossession of 1.300 kilograms of ganja. on secret information the police parties went to that place, intercepted the accused and arrested them with contraband. hence, the case.3. the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that thepetitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. the petitioner is in custody from 05.06.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this court. hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.4. the learned counsel appearing for the state reiterated the prosecutioncase and reported that the petitioner has 8 previous cases, out of which one is similar in nature. investigation is still pending. he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.5. this court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.6. considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature ofoffences, though the petitioner has 8 previous cases, i have gone through the list of previous cases and found that most of the cases are filed under ipc offences, the quantity of contraband involved in this case is not commercial quantity, and also considering the period of incarceration and i am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. [a] accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of rs.15,000/- (rupees fifteen thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned additional district judge, principal special court for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act cases, madurai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the learned additional district judge, principal special court for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act cases, madurai, at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, for a period of four weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of thecommission of which he/she is suspected; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make anyinducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the factsof 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 51730]. [g] if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh fir can be registered under section 269 bns. (k r s j) 02.07.2026 tm to 1.the additional district judge, principal special court for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act cases, madurai.2.the inspector of police, town west police station, dindigul district. (crime no.186 of 2026) 3.the superintendent, district prison, dindigul. 4.the additional public prosecutor, madurai bench of madras high court, madurai.k. rajasekar, j.tmorderin crl op(md) no. 13077 of 2026 date : 02.07.2026
Judgment:

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 02.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 13077 of 2026 Ajith Surendhar ...Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Town West Police Station, Dindigul District. (Crime No.186 of 2026) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sudhanthiran Advocate For Respondent : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 186 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.06.2026, for the offences punishable under Section 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.186 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in

possession of 1.300 Kilograms of Ganja. On secret information the police parties went to that place, intercepted the accused and arrested them with contraband. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the

petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner is in custody from 05.06.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution

case and reported that the petitioner has 8 previous cases, out of which one is similar in nature. Investigation is still pending. He opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of

offences, though the petitioner has 8 previous cases, I have gone through the list of previous cases and found that most of the cases are filed under IPC offences, the quantity of contraband involved in this case is not commercial quantity, and also considering the period of incarceration and I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District Judge, Principal Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Additional District Judge, Principal Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai, at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, for a period of four weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the

commission of which he/she is suspected; [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 51730]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS. (K R S J) 02.07.2026 TM To 1.The Additional District Judge, Principal Special Court for Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act Cases, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Town West Police Station, Dindigul District. (Crime No.186 of 2026) 3.The Superintendent, District Prison, Dindigul. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 13077 of 2026 Date : 02.07.2026