Govindsingh v. State By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP No.164 of 2026 Govindsingh S/o.Vishan Singh ... Petitioner/ Accused -2 Vs The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Kaveripakkam Police Station, Ranipet District.

(Crime No. 381 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. [Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023], pleased to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest by the respondent in Crime No.381 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr. Thirumoorthy D For Respondent : M/s.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ******

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 7(5) and 20(2) of Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 [COTPA Act] and 123 of BNS Act, 2023 [328 of IPC] in Crime No.381 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/4

2.

The allegation against this petitioner is that, the petitioner is ranked as A2 in this case and he engaged A1 who is the driver of the car to transport 420 kgs of banned tobacco products and after loading the same in the car, the petitioner directed the driver to transport the same to Poonamallee, Chennai, and on the way to Poonamallee, he was intercepted by the police and contraband was recovered. Hence, this case. 3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case only based on the confession statement of the A1; the petitioner have no previous cases and is ready to co-operate with the investigation and also ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, hence sought for anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the anticipatory bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the car and he only categorically instructed the driver to transport the contraband to Chennai, that the investigation of this case is pending. 2/4

6.

Considering the submissions made on both sides and perused the materials available on record.

7.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, gravity of offence, nature and quantity of contraband involved in this case and the fact that the petitioner is the one who engaged the first accused in transporting the contraband and taking note of the fact that the investigation of the case is pending, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8.

Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 08.01.2026 ssa To

1. The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate-I, Walajah.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kaveripakkam Police Station, Ranipet District.

(Crime No.381 of 2025)

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

ssa Crl.O.P. No.164 of 2026 08.01.2026 4/4