Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 44619 (MAD)

G.RAMESH v. State by its Union of India

CRL OP/15554/2026 · 2026-06-30

C Kumarappan

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP No. 15554 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 15554 of 2026 G.Ramesh ..Petitioner Vs State by its Union of India Rep by its Intelligence officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal unit, Chennai. (R.R.No.32/2021) ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner/Accused-2 on bail in C.C.No.83 of 2022 pending on the file of I Additional Judge Special court for exclusive trial cases under NDPS Act at Chennai. For Petitioner: Ms.P.Keerthana for M/s. Murali Law Firm For Respondent: Mr.N.P.Kumar, Special Public Prosecutor ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.08.2021 for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c), r/w 22(C), 28 & 29 of NDPS Act, 1985 in C.C.No.83 of 2022 pending on the file of the learned I https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 15554 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5 Additional Judge Special Court for exclusive trial cases under NDPS Act at Chennai in RR.No.32 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the Investigating Officer received information that a truck bearing registration No.TN20AR5650 would be carrying 8 kg of Methamphetamine. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer arrested the truck driver and made inquiries. Upon questioning the truck driver, it was found that the contraband would be delivered to one Ramesh/Petitioner. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that this is a case of recovery 8 kg of Methamphetamine. There are about three accused and this petitioner is arrayed as A2. A1 and A3 are already in jail. He further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner invited the attention of this Court to the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh and State Rep by Union of India in SLP (Crl) Diary No.67613 of 2025 dated 23.02.2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 15554 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5 and would contend that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has directed the trial Court to disposed of the matter as expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months. Now that almost after the lapse of three months, still PW1 evidence is in the box. 5. The said contention was objected by the learned Special Public Prosecutor. He submitted that as per the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, on the date when the application was disposed of, the witnesses, which was in the box, was the last prosecution witness. However, only upon filing up an application for recall by this petitioner, there was a delay. Therefore, there is no fault on the part of the prosecution to complete the trial within the above period of time. 6. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record. 7. Though, the learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that PW1 is in the box, while pronouncing the orders by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that on 23.02.2026, the witness examined before the Court was the last prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the contention urged by the learned Special Public Prosecutor that the delay was only on account of filing the recall application of the petitioner cannot be faulted. In such view of the circumstances, this Court https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 15554 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 could not find any ground to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 30-06-2026 SHL To: 1. The Intelligence officer, Narcotics Control Bureau, Chennai Zonal unit, Chennai. 2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 15554 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 C.KUMARAPPAN J. SHL CRL OP No. 15554 of 2026 30-06-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis