Dismissed¶43

Rizwan Ultag v. State Rep by

Madras HC11 Nov 2025CRL OP/15123/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Crl.O.P.No.15123 of 2025, High Court of Judicature at Madras, decided 11.11.2025 by K. Rajasekar, J. Bail application of A3 Rizwan Ultag in Crime No.760 of 2024 (Sulur Police Station, Coimbatore) under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1) NDPS Act; 22 kgs ganja (commercial quantity) seized on 14.10.2024; bail denied as twin conditions of Section 37 NDPS Act unsatisfied; petition filed under Section 483 BNSS 2023 dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Bail refused: the petitioner along with other accused was found in possession of ganja which is commercial quantity, and the petitioner failed to satisfy the twin conditions contemplated under Section 37 of NDPS Act; therefore the Court was not inclined to grant bail. ¶42

Rizwan Ultag Vs State Rep by — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.15123 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 11.11.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.15123 of 2025

¶7

Rizwan Ultag ...... Petitioner/A3 Vs.

¶8

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Sulur Police Station, Coimbatore District. (Crime No.760 of 2024) ... Respondent

¶9

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.760 of 2024 pending on the file of the respondent Police.

¶10

For Petitioner : M/s.T.Balaji For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

¶13

1/5

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

Crl.O.P.No.15123 of 2025 14.10.2024, for the offence punishable under Sections 8(c) read with Sections

¶16

20(b)(ii)(C), 29(1) of NDPS Act in Crime No.760 of 2024, registered on the

¶17

file of the respondent, seeks bail.

¶18

The case of the prosecution is that the respondent police received

¶19

information about the transportation of ganja, that the petitioner is likely to

¶20

transport 22 kgs of ganja from Andhra Pradesh to Tamil Nadu. On the basis of information received, the respondent police had illegally transported 22

¶21

kgs of ganja from Andhra Pradesh to Tamil Nadu On information received, the respondent police at about 15.00 hrs, on 14.10.2024, intercepted the petitioner along with two other person who were waiting with plastic bag, after following the mandatory procedure, they conducted search and seized

¶22

22 kgs of ganja (commercial quantity) and thereafter respondent police

¶23

arrested them and remanded to judicial custody. Hence, the case.

¶24

2/5

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

Crl.O.P.No.15123 of 2025

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that,

¶28

petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case and no recovery effected from the petitioner. Hence, he prays for grant

¶29

of bail to the petitioner.

¶30

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reitereated the

¶31

prosecution case and submitted that A1 and A2 went to Andhra Pradesh and

¶32

brought 22 kgs of ganja and and petitioner joined with them at Railway Station and three persons transported the same in the Auto and came to the

¶33

bus stand. At that time, police have beenintercepted and the contraband was

¶34

recovered. He further submitted that the petitioner and other accused are

¶35

known to each other and they hails from the same place and hence the petitioner was in conscious possession of the contraband. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶36