Dismissed¶30

Syed Rizwan v. The State rep by, The Inspector of Police

Madras HC8 Jun 2026CRL OP/8948/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, CRL OP No. 8948 of 2026, decided 08-06-2026 by C. Kumarappan J. Bail petition under Section 483 BNSS 2023 by Syed Rizwan, sole accused, Crime No.136/2025, St. Thomas Mount PEW Police Station, Chennai, for offences under Sections 8(c) and 20(b)(ii)(c) NDPS Act 1985; recovery of 21 kg ganja held commercial quantity; charge sheet filed 09.10.2025; trial commenced, P.W.1 posted 10.06.2026; bail denied for failure to satisfy Section 37 NDPS Act rigour; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

This Court was of the view that the recovery from the petitioner of 21 kilograms of ganja is a commercial quantity. ¶26

Syed Rizwan Vs The State rep by, The Inspector of Police — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CRL OP No. 8948 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 08-06-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 8948 of 2026

Syed Rizwan

..Petitioner

State Represented by, Inspector of Police, St. Thomas Mount, PEW Police Station, Chennai District. (Crime No.136/2025)

¶10

..Respondent

¶11

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in C.C.No.1173 of 2025 on the file of the II Additional Special Court for Exclusive Trial of cases under NDPS Act at Chennai.

¶12

For Petitioner: Mr.P.Krishnakumar For Respondent: Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar Counsel for Government of Tamilnadu (Criminal Side)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.06.2025 for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(c) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985, in Crime No.136 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶15

Page1 of 4

¶16

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

¶17

CRL OP No. 8948 of 2026

¶18

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in possession of 21 kilograms of ganja. Hence the case.

¶19

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 22.06.2025 and though the charge sheet was filed on 09.10.2025, not even a single witness has been examined till date. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submitted that the petitioner is innocent and 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. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶20

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that this is a case of sole accused and recovery of 21 kilograms of ganja. It is further submitted that the trial has already commenced and the case is posted on 10.06.2026 for examination of P.W.1 and the prosecution is ready to examine the witnesses. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶21

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

¶22

Page2 of 4

¶23

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

¶24

CRL OP No. 8948 of 2026

¶25

From the submission of the learned counsel on either side, this Court is

¶26

of the view that the recovery from the petitioner is 21 kilograms of ganja, which

¶27

is commercial quantity. Further, the trial has already commenced and the

¶28

prosecution is ready to proceed with the examination of witnesses. Considering the commercial quantity involved and in the absence of any material to

¶29

overcome the rigour under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶30