Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 10337 of 2026 Kalimuthu @ Vellaikali ...Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, PEW - Madurai City Police Station, Madurai. (Crime No.229 of 2025) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.M.G.Martinmanivannan Advocate For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 229 of 2025 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 11.12.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w. 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 & 29(1) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.229 of 2025 on the file of 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026 the respondent police, seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on secret information on 07.10.2025, the respondent police went to the scene of occurrence, where they found the accused persons are in possession of 23 kilograms of ganja. 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. Though the quantity involved is commercial quantity, no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and the entire contraband have been recovered from Co-accused. This petitioner has been implicated on the basis of the confession statement of the co-accused. Co-accused in this case have been released on bail. The petitioner was not arrested in the scene of occurrence. When he was in jail in another case, he was formally arrested on 11.12.2025. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The entire 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026 contraband has been recovered from Co-accused. The petitioner has 32 previous cases. Out of which five cases were disposed of and in which in one case he was convicted and undergoing the sentence. While so on the basis of the confession statement co-accused this petitioner has been implicated in this case. Because, there is some materials like call details. Investigation in this case has been completed and charge sheet has also been filed before the concerned Court. Hence, 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 rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity, the contraband was recovered from Co-accused and no contraband has been recovered from this petitioner, only on the basis of the confession statement of the co-accused this petitioner has been implicated in this case, co-accused has also been released on bail, though according to the prosecution the petitioner has 32 previous cases and out of which five cases were disposed and one case was ended in conviction, in all other cases, the petitioner was granted bail, the petitioner was 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026

in custody more than 6 years, on the date of alleged occurrence he is in custody, though the prosecution has stated that there are some material like, call details and other particulars, the same can be considered only during the trial, and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [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 District and Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, until further orders: [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; 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026

[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. (P D B J) 16.06.2026 TM To 1.The District and Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, PEW - Madurai City Police Station, Madurai. (Crime No.229 of 2025) 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026 P. DHANABAL, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10337 of 2026 Date : 16.06.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 10337 of 2026 Kalimuthu @ Vellaikali ...Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, PEW - Madurai City Police Station, Madurai. (Crime No.229 of 2025) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.M.G.Martinmanivannan Advocate For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 229 of 2025 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 11.12.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w. 20(b)(ii)(C), 25 & 29(1) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.229 of 2025 on the file of 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026 the respondent police, seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on secret information on 07.10.2025, the respondent police went to the scene of occurrence, where they found the accused persons are in possession of 23 kilograms of ganja. 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. Though the quantity involved is commercial quantity, no contraband was recovered from this petitioner and the entire contraband have been recovered from Co-accused. This petitioner has been implicated on the basis of the confession statement of the co-accused. Co-accused in this case have been released on bail. The petitioner was not arrested in the scene of occurrence. When he was in jail in another case, he was formally arrested on 11.12.2025. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The entire 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026 contraband has been recovered from Co-accused. The petitioner has 32 previous cases. Out of which five cases were disposed of and in which in one case he was convicted and undergoing the sentence. While so on the basis of the confession statement co-accused this petitioner has been implicated in this case. Because, there is some materials like call details. Investigation in this case has been completed and charge sheet has also been filed before the concerned Court. Hence, 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 rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, the quantity involved in this case is commercial quantity, the contraband was recovered from Co-accused and no contraband has been recovered from this petitioner, only on the basis of the confession statement of the co-accused this petitioner has been implicated in this case, co-accused has also been released on bail, though according to the prosecution the petitioner has 32 previous cases and out of which five cases were disposed and one case was ended in conviction, in all other cases, the petitioner was granted bail, the petitioner was 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026

in custody more than 6 years, on the date of alleged occurrence he is in custody, though the prosecution has stated that there are some material like, call details and other particulars, the same can be considered only during the trial, and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [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 District and Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the learned District and Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai, at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, until further orders: [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; 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026

[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. (P D B J) 16.06.2026 TM To 1.The District and Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, PEW - Madurai City Police Station, Madurai. (Crime No.229 of 2025) 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.10337 of 2026 P. DHANABAL, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10337 of 2026 Date : 16.06.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis