Crl.O.P.No.18591 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-10-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.18591 of 2025 Tharmaraj ... Petitioner/ A1 Vs The Union of India rep. by, The Intelligence Officer, NCB, Chennai. (NCB F.No.48/1/20/2024-NCB/MDS) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail to the petitioner/accused in NCB F.No.48/1/20/2024-NCB/MDS on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner(s) : Mr. B. Ganesha Moorthy For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.P. Kumar Spl. Public Prosecutor ******* 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18591 of 2025 ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.09.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C), 28 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985 in NCB F.No.48/1/20/2024- NCB/MDS, registered on the file respondent police, seeks bail. The earlier bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court, vide order dated 24.02.2025 in Crl.O.P.No.967 of 2025. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on a secret information, when the petitioner along with A2 was intercepted by the respondent, they were found in possession of 2 kilograms of Ganja which was seized on 25.09.2025; that the petitioner on further interrogation had revealed the fact that the petitioner along with A2 were in possession of 30 packets and was thrown in a bush besides Chennai-Srikakulam Highway in Tadepallee area on their return from Andhra Pradesh to Tirupur; and that totally 50.7 kilograms of greenish brown dry leaves along with flowering tops was therefore seized on 26.09.2024. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18591 of 2025 the petitioner was falsely implicated in this case and only as per mahazar, it is alleged that only 2 kilograms of ganja alone was seized from the petitioner; that on confession of the other accused, another 50.7 kilograms of ganja was seized on the Chennai-Srikakulam Highway and hence Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not applicable he is in judicial custody since 03.09.2025; that the final report is also filed in this case; and that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and sought for bail to the petitioner. 4. 4. Per contra, the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and stated that the seizure mahazar and photographs indicates that the seizure was made at the instance of A1 and A2; that the total quantity involved in this case is 52.700 kilograms of ganja, which falls under commercial quantity and rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would be applicable. He also submitted that the final report was filed and the case is posted for engaging the counsel for the petitioner and if the petitioner is released on bail it may cause delay in the trial process. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18591 of 2025 K. RAJASEKAR, J. stn 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the earlier bail application of the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.967 of 2025 was dismissed on the ground that rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act is applicable to the case of the petitioner and no grounds has been made before this Court for satisfying the twin condition of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 06.10.2025 stn To 1. The Union of India rep. by, The Intelligence Officer, NCB, Chennai. (NCB F.No.48/1/20/2024-NCB/MDS) 2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.O.P. No.18591 of 2025 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis