Ganesan @ Venkatakrishnan vs State by Inspector of Police

CRL OP No. 31423 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL OP No. 31423 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012533562026}
and
CRL MP No. 20855 of 2026
Ganesan @ Venkatakrishnan
S/o Raghuraman,
277, Makailamman Koil Veethi,
Mukasi Hanumanpalli Post,
Erode.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
State by Inspector of Police
Arachalur Police Station,
Erode.
Crime No. 267/2022
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS Act,
praying to call for records in CC No. 184/2025 on the file of the Special Court
for Essential Commodities and NDPS Act, Coimbatore and quash the charges
against the petitioner.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.S. Patrick
For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in CC No. 184/2025
on the file of the Special Court for Essential Commodities and NDPS Act,
Coimbatore, thereby taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 8(c) read
with Sections 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
Act, 1985.
__________
Page1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 02:14:05 pm )

CRL OP No. 31423 of 2026
2.The case of the prosecution is that on 04.11.2022 at about 10.30 a.m,
while conducting vehicle checks at Avalpoondurai Four Roads on the
Kangeyam-Erode Main Road, the police team attempted to stop a suspicious
black two-wheeler carrying three individuals. Two pillion riders /A2 and A4
namely, Ajith @ Ajithkumar (22) and Fakeer Maideen Jameer(23), jumped off
and were caught, while the rider escaped on the motorcycle. They identified the
escaped rider as Ganesan and confessed that they were heading to buy ganja
stored by Ganesan, the petitioner herein at the residence of Bala (A2) in
Rasampalayam. They were formally arrested at 11.00 a.m accompanied by
revenue witnesses IVAOR.Ponnar and Village Assistant A.John Nath). The
police went to Rasampalayam and located A2, who was bedridden recovering
from a leg fracture and he admitted that A1 had paid him to stash three travel
bags filled with ganja packets in his house and A1 was arrested at 2.30 p.m. A
total of approximately 19 kg 800 grams of ganja across the 11 packets seized
from the accused (at approximately 1 kg 800 grams each after sampling), along
with 11 sample packets of 100 grams each collected from every packet for
chemical analysis, were secured. After completion of investigation, the
respondent filed final report and the same has been taken cognizance by the trial
Court.
3.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the
materials on record.
__________
Page2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 02:14:05 pm )

CRL OP No. 31423 of 2026
4.There are totally four accused in this case, in which, the petitioner is
arrayed as A1. The specific case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has
been implicated as an accused only based on the confession statement of the
second and third accused, alleging that the first accused along with the second
and third accused were travelling in a motorcycle and after seeing the police
personnels, A2 and A2 jumped from the two wheeler in order to escape.
However they were caught hold by the respondent herein and the first accused
flew away from the scene of occurrence with his motorcycle. Subsequently, the
first respondent went to the house of the second accused and recovered the
contrabands weighing about 19 kg 800 grams. Further, the allegation against
the first accused is that the first accused used to purchase the contraband and
stored in the house of the second accused. Thereafter, the contraband to be sold
by all the accused. However, there is no recovery from A1. That apart, though
the prosecution specifically alleged that the first accused along with the third
and fourth accused were travelling in a motorcycle, the first accused escaped
from the scene of occurrence. The prosecution has failed to recover the motor
cycle which was allegedly driven by the first accused in which A3 and A4 were
also travelling as pillion riders. Further, the prosecution has also failed to
produce the call details to connect the first accused with the other accused.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court granted
anticipatory bail to the first accused/petitioner herein.
__________
Page3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 02:14:05 pm )

CRL OP No. 31423 of 2026
5.A perusal of the entire records, including the FIR, seizure mahazar,
statements of witnesses and the final report, would clearly demonstrate that,
even if the entire case of the prosecution case is taken at its face value and
accepted in its entirety, the same does not disclose the commission of any
offence against the first accused. The materials collected during the course of
investigation do not constitute any legally admissible or incriminating evidence
connecting the petitioner/first accused with the alleged contraband recovered
from A3 and A4. Therefore, the first accused has been implicated solely on the
basis of the confession statements of A3 and A4. Further, there are no
allegations or materials to establish the conscious possession, knowledge,
participation, or any nexus between the petitioner/first accused and the alleged
contraband.
6.Furthermore, the confession statement of a co-accused cannot form the
basis of the prosecution in the absence of any legally admissible material. The
alleged confession statement of the co-accused recorded by the police is hit by
Section 23 of the BSA, corresponding to Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act,
1872, and is inadmissible in view of the law laid down by the Honourable
Supreme Court of India in Tofan Singh Vs. State of Tamil Nadu , reported in
(2021) 4 SCC 1 , wherein it was held that the officers invested with powers
under Section 53 of the NDPS Act are “police officers” within the meaning of
Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act and that a confessional statement
__________
Page4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 02:14:05 pm )

CRL OP No. 31423 of 2026
recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act cannot be used as a confessional
statement against an accused in the trial of an offence under the NDPS Act.
Consequently, in the present case also, the alleged confession statement of the
co-accused cannot be constituted as legally admissible evidence against the
petitioner. Equally, the confession statement of the co-accused also cannot be
translated into admissible evidence at the stage of trial. Therefore, the
continuation of criminal proceedings against the first accused is unsustainable in
law and amounts to an abuse of process of law. Hence, on this ground alone,
the impugned proceedings is liable to be quashed insofar as the first accused is
concerned.
7.Accordingly, the proceedings in CC No. 184/2025 on the file of the
Special Court for Essential Commodities and NDPS Act, Coimbatore, is hereby
quashed against the petitioner/first accused alone is concerned, and the Criminal
Original Petition stands allowed. The trial Court is directed to proceed with the
trial against the other accused, namely, A2 to A4, in accordance with law.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
29-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Uma
__________
Page5 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 02:14:05 pm )

CRL OP No. 31423 of 2026
To
1.The the Special Court for Essential Commodities and NDPS Act, Coimbatore
2.State by Inspector of Police
Arachalur Police Station,
Erode.
Crime No. 267/2022
3.The Public Prosecutor
High Court of Madras.
__________
Page6 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 02:14:05 pm )

CRL OP No. 31423 of 2026
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN J.
Uma
CRL OP No. 31423 of 2026
and
CRL MP No. 20855 OF 2026
29-10-2026
__________
Page7 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 02:14:05 pm )