Ragul Subhash vs State

C.Kumarappan, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.03.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(B), 25 and 29(1) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.120 of 2026 on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with the other accused, was found to be in illegal possession of 2.200 kgs of ganja. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there are about three accused and this petitioner is A1. He would further submit that the petitioner has been under incarceration since 14.03.2026 and that the threshold limit of intermediate quantity of 2.200 kgs of ganja was recovered. He would further submit that the similarly placed co-accused, namely, A2 and A3 were enlarged on bail by the Principal Special Court under EC and NDPS Act Cases, Chennai. Hence, he prays for the grant of bail.

The learned Government Advocate would oppose the bail application on the ground that the petitioner has got five previous cases. However, he would fairly submit that those cases are under IPC offences and not under NDPS cases.

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

Taking into consideration of the recovery of an intermediate quantity of contraband and the long incarceration of the petitioner since 14.03.2026, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with certain conditions:

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the Principal Special Court under EC and NDPS Act, Chennai, subject to the following conditions:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of 30 days;

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

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.