VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Palanimurugan v. The State of Tamilnadu Rep by the Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar West

GRANTED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
12 June 2026
Bench
P.Dhanabalauthor
Case no.
CRL OP(MD) 10854/2026

Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 12/06/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Palanimurugan ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar West Police Station, Virudhunagar District. (In Crime No.151 of 2026). ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.151 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : S. Maya Perumal, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(A) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 r/w Section 77 of Juvenile Justice Act, in Crime No.151 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 30.05.2026, when the respondent police were on patrol duty, found that the petitioner and other accused were in illegal possession of 100 grams of ganja meant to be sole to the school going children. Hence, the case.

¶3The 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 no previous case is pending against the petitioner and the petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.05.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner and other accused were found in illegal possession of 100 grams of ganja and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner.

¶5This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and the quantity involved in this case is not a commercial quantity and no previous case is pending against the petitioner 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: [a] Accordingly, 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 Judicial Magistrate No.I, Virudhunagar, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J)

12.06.2026 dss

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Virudhunagar.

2.The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar West Police Station,Virudhunagar District.

¶3The Superintendent, District Prison, Virudhunagar.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. P. DHANABAL,J DSS ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10854 of 2026 Date : 12/06/2026

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.