Alagu Alias Alagar v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Alagu @ Alagar ... Petitioner/A2 Vs.

State rep by The Inspector of Police, B-3, Variety Hall Police Station, Coimbatore District.

... Respondent (Crime No.28 of 2026) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest pending investigation in Crime No.28 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.N.Balakrishnan For Respondent :

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 4(1) (A), 4(1) (C) of TNP (Amendment) Act r/w 24 of TNP Act in Crime No.28 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that when the respondent police was 1/4

on regular patrol was found that the petitioner, along with others, were in illegal possession of IMFL liquor against the Liquor Rules and seized 148 liquor bottles of various brands. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has already got anticipatory bail in Crime No.9 of 2026 and that when he approached the police to comply the condition, again the respondent registered this present crime number against the petitioner and that this is a put-up case. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution's case and, would strongly oppose the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner on the sole ground that the petitioner has got 3 previous cases Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. No doubt, however, is premature to go in to the allegation of the petitioner. However, from the submission made by the learned Government 2/4

Advocate (Crl.Side), it is amply clear that the petitioner has misused the liberty granted by this Court. Hence, this Court is of the view that it is not desirable to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 10.03.2026 ssi To:

1.The Inspector of Police, Vellore Taluk Police Station, Vellore District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN,J., ssi 3/4

10.03.2026 4/4