Allowed

Dheenadhayalan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Nadukaveri

Madras HC27 Nov 2025CRL OP(MD)/21624/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petitioner held in judicial custody after arrest for alleged possession of 1.28 kgs of ganja sought regular bail. Despite two previous cases, the court granted bail since the seized contraband was not commercial quantity and considering his period of incarceration, imposing standard conditions including daily reporting to the respondent police.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail: bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties before Special Court for Essential Commodities Act Cases, Thanjavur, plus conditions incl. daily police reporting at 10.30 a.m.

Dheenadhayalan Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.21624 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 27/11/2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.21624 of 2025

¶8

Dheenadhayalan .. Petitioner/A2

¶9

¶10

State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Nadukaveri Police Station, Thanjavur District, Crime No.330/2025. .. Respondent/Complainant

¶11

For Petitioner : C.Senthil Murugan,

¶12

Advocate.

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶14

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS

¶15

PRAYER :- C-32B.For Bail in Crime No.330/2025 on the file of the respondent police.

¶16

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶17

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to

¶18

judicial custody on 17.11.2025 for the offences

¶19

punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B)of

¶20

NDPS Act, 1985, in Crime No.330 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶21

1/4

¶22

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

¶23

CRL OP(MD). No.21624 of 2025

¶24

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other accused persons were found illegal possession of 1.28 kgs of Ganja. Hence, the complaint.

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner

¶26

submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 17.11.2025. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

¶27

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor

¶28

submitted that the petitioner is having two previous cases. However, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶29

Taking into consideration of the facts and

¶30

circumstances of the case and inspite the petitioner is having two previous cases, considering the fact

¶31

that the seized contraband is not commercial

¶32

2/4

¶33

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

¶34

CRL OP(MD). No.21624 of 2025

¶35

quantity, and also considering the period of

¶36

incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

¶37

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be

¶38

released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional District and Sessions

¶39

Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court for Essential Commodities Act Cases, Thanjavur, and on further conditions that :-

¶40

shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

¶41

the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m.,

¶42

until further orders;

¶43

3/4

¶44

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

¶45

CRL OP(MD). No.21624 of 2025

¶46

S.SRIMATHY,J.

¶47

PJL

¶48

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 is 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];

¶49

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

¶50

27.11.2025

¶51

PJL TO 1.The Additional District and Sessions Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court for Essential Commodities Act Cases, Thanjavur. 2. The Superintendent, District Prison, Thanjavur. 3. The Inspector of Police, Nadukaveri Police Station,Thanjavur District.

¶52

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. CRL OP(MD) No.21624 of 2025

¶53

4/4

¶54

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

Dheenadhayalan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Nadukaveri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dheenadhayalan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Nadukaveri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendran Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Pooma @ Boovammal Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Sindupatti

Aravindkumar Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Ettayapuram

Anumalingam Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Sessions Court

R.Sasikumar, Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Koodal Pudur

Nagaraj, Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Ilupur