Santhi v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.1990 of 2026 Santhi W/o.Ravi ... Petitioner/ Accused Vs The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Pennadam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

(Crime No. 307 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under 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.307 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Arumugam For Respondent : Mr. 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 275, 123 of BNS, 2023 and Section 24(1) of COTPA Act, 2003 in Crime No.307 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/4

2.

The allegation against this petitioner is that, when the respondent police was conducting a raid, the petitioner was found with illegal possession of 22 pouches of 330 packets of banned tobacco products in her shop. Hence, this case.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution; that the petitioner herein was not aware of the offence alleged and that the petitioner is 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 was found with illegal possession of banned tobacco products in her shop and there are four previous cases of similar in nature; and that the investigation of this case is pending.

5.

Considering the submissions made on both sides and perused 2/4

the materials available on record.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, gravity of offence, the petitioner had bad antecedants 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.

7.

Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 29.01.2026 ssa To

1. The Inspector of Police, Pennadam Police Station, Cuddalore District.

(Crime No. 307 of 2025)

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

ssa Crl.O.P. No.1990 of 2026 29.01.2026 4/4