Madras High Court Grants Bail To Actors Krishna & Srikanth Booked For Consuming Drugs

Justice M Nirmal Kumar noted that the actors had purchased cocaine only for their personal use, which would attract Section 27 (Punishment for consumption of any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance) of NDPS Act. Since the offence under Section 27 was a bailable one, the court was inclined to grant bail.

“It is seen that the petitioners purchased cocaine only for their personal consumption and hence, the case against the petitioners attracts Section 27 of NDPS Act. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions,” the court said.

The court thus directed the actors to be released on bail on executing a bond for Rs. 10,000 with two sureties for a like sum. The court also directed the actors to report before the police daily at 10:30 a.m. for a period of two weeks, as and when required. The court also asked the actors to give an undertaking that they would comply with the directions of the court for being identified by the witnesses during the investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days.

The actors were arrested on 26^th June and 23^rd June for offences under NDPS Act Sections 8(c) (prohibition on prodution, manufacture, possession, sale, purchase, consumption, import inter-State, export inter-State, import into India, export from India or tranship any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance), 22(b)(Punishment for contravention in relation to psychotropic substances, where contravention involves quantity lesser than commercial quantity but greater than small quantity), 27 and 29(1) (Punishment for abetment and criminal conspiracy).

The de facto complainant, Sub-Inspector of Police, had received information on June 17 that a person was carrying cocaine with him. The man was apprehended by the police, and based on his confession, his supplier was also arrested. During the investigation, it was found that the actors had also purchased cocaine for their personal consumption.

The actors were thus called for enquiry and subjected to medical examination. Medical test of Krishna turned negative, while that of Srikanth turned positive, and the presence of cocaine was confirmed during the Urine Drug Screening Test. The actors were then arrested.

The actors argued that their arrest was in violation of the statutory provisions under BNSS and Article 22 of the Constitution, as they were detained in the police station for more than 24 hours without arrest. It was also argued that the confession of the co-accused was inadmissible, and there was no recovery from the actors. It was also argued that neither the grounds of arrest nor the arrest memo were communicated to the petitioner or their family.

The Government Advocate argued that the Special team, which had intercepted the actors, was formed to curb the drug menace, and it had been noted that the higher echelon of society was using drugs during parties and gatherings. It was submitted that there were no previous cases against the actors and that the investigation was in progress.

After hearing the parties, the court was inclined to grant bail and ordered accordingly.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. L. Infant Dinesh, Mr. R. John Sathyan, Senior Counsel for Mr. K. Prem Anand

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. R. Vinothraja, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

Case Title: Krishna @ Krishnakumar v. The State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 232

Case No: Crl.O.P.Nos.19330 & 19370 of 2025