High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 07 MAD CK 0175

Harikrishnan vs State of Tamil Nadu

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench · Decided on 29 July 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
K.Rajasekar, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
CRL OP(MD). No.15715 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 569 words

The petitioner/Sole Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.07.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(A) of NDPS Act, r/w Section 77 of the Juvenile Justice Act, in Crime No.177 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that on 03.07.2026, at about 16.30 hours, while the respondent Police were on surveillance duty at Virudhunagar, ATP Compound, near Kaliyamman Temple, to prohibit the sale of illegal substances, they found that the petitioner was in illegal possession of 50 gms of Ganja. Hence, the complaint has been registered.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He further submitted that the petitioner is incarceration from 03.07.2026 and the quantity involved in this case is a small quantity and Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not applicable to this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4.

The learned Counsel for State of TN (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and reported that the petitioner illegally trafficked 50 gms of Ganja. He further submitted that the investigation in this case is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the quantity recovered is a small quantity and Section 37 of the NDPS Act is not applicable to this case and also considering the the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner from 03.07.2026, this Court is 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.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputtur, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and 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 5560].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.