Allowed

M. Hiruthick Dev v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Ss Colony

Madras HC18 Jun 2026CRL OP(MD)/11544/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail petition under Section 483 BNSS by an NDPS accused arrested on a co-accused's confession after seizure of 2 kg ganja, a non-commercial quantity, with no prior cases. The court granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, daily police reporting and standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties; daily reporting at 10.30 a.m.; conditions against similar offences, absconding and evidence tampering.

M. Hiruthick Dev Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of… — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.11544 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 18/06/2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.11544 of 2026

¶8

M.Hiruthick Dev

¶9

... Petitioner/Accused

¶10

¶11

State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, SS Colony Police Station, Madurai District. Crime No. 197/2026.

¶12

... Respondent/Complainant

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Mani maran,

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶15

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS

¶16

PRAYER :-

¶17

For Bail in Crime No. 197 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police.

¶18

1/6

¶19

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

¶20

CRL OP(MD). No.11544 of 2026

¶21

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶22

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 20.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(B) of NDPS, Act, 1985 in Crime No. 197 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶23

The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information, on 20.05.2026, at about 12.45 p.m., on receipt of secret message, the respondent police went to Pillaiyar Kovil Street, SS Colony and on suspicion, they conduct search in the while sack bag held by the first accused and found 2.000 kgs of ganga. On enquiry, A1 confessed that he is selling the contraband with the help of A2 and A3/petitioner. Hence the case.

¶24

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that based on the confession of coaccused he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 20.05.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

¶25

2/6

¶26

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

¶27

CRL OP(MD). No.11544 of 2026

¶28

The learned Government Advocate appearing for the

¶29

respondent would submit that the accused persons found in illegal possession of 2 kgs of ganja, due to which the case has been registered. He would further submit that though the petitioner has no previous cases, considering the stage of investigation and the nature of grave offence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶30

This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶31

Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and quantity of contraband involved in this case is not a commercial quantity and considering the fact that the petitioner has been arrested in this case, based on the confession of co-accused and he has no previous cases to his credit and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶32

3/6

¶33

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

¶34

CRL OP(MD). No.11544 of 2026

¶35

[a] Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is

¶36

allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai , and on further conditions that:

¶37

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

¶38

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar

¶39

to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

¶40

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶41

[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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶42

4/6

¶43

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

¶44

CRL OP(MD). No.11544 of 2026

¶45

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the

¶46

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].

¶47

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

¶48

PNM

¶49

¶50

The Sessions Judge, Principal Special Court for EC and NDPS Act Cases, Madurai

¶51

Do-Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai District.

¶52

The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai.

¶53

The Inspector of Police, SS Colony Police Station, Madurai.

¶54

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶55

¶56

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

¶57

CRL OP(MD). No.11544 of 2026

¶58

P. DHANABAL,J

¶59

PNM

¶60

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11544 of 2026

¶61

Date : 18/06/2026

¶62

6/6

¶63

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

M. Hiruthick Dev v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Ss Colony

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Hiruthick Dev v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Ss Colony

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

Kannan Vs The Inspector of Police

Jegadeesan Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

Esah Aron alias Esa alias Yesa Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Kalakkad

S.Jahir Hussain Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police

Karthick Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep.by

Marikannan Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Kovilpatti West