Santhosh Karthick v. The State Rep. by Its Inspector of Police

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

29.12.2025 for the alleged offences under Sections 8(c) r/w 22(c), 29(1) of NDPS Act, in Crime No.329 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. Page2 of 4

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 29.12.2025, based on secret information, the respondent police conducted vehicle checkup and intercepted a car in which the petitioner and others were travelling. On search, 54 grams of Methamphetamine was recovered from A1 and based on the statement of A1, it was revealed that the contraband was transported for sale. Hence, the case was registered.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that there was no recovery from the petitioner and he has been falsely implicated in the case merely because of his presence. It is further submitted that he had earlier dispute with the Sub-Inspector of Police and due to such enmity, a false case has been foisted. The learned counsel would also submit that the petitioner is a student and was preparing for his MBA examination at the relevant time and has no involvement in the offence. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner along with other accused were travelling in the same vehicle and contraband was recovered. It is further submitted that the quantity involved is commercial quantity and the offence attracts the rigour under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Page3 of 4

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

¶6This Court is of the view that on perusal of the records, it is seen that the petitioner along with other accused were travelling in the same vehicle and there was recovery of 54 grams of Methamphetamine. Considering the nature of the contraband and the quantity involved in this case, this Court is of the view that it falls under commercial quantity. Further, the petitioner has failed to satisfy the twin conditions as contemplated under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶7Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 30-04-2026 NSL To

¶1The Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai Taluk Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

¶2The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o11264oofo2026 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,oJ. NSL CRLoOPoNo.o11264oofo2026 30-04-2026 Page4oofo4

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN Santhosh Karthick ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep. by its Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai Taluk Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. Crime No.329 of 2025 ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.329 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner: Mr.Sathiyaraj E. For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)