M.Harish Alias M.Harsan Kumar v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN M.Harish Alias @ M.Harsan Kumar Son of Masara ram, 66/29, Kandhu Muthusamy Street, Namakkal, Namakkal - 637 001.

...Petitioner/A2

Vs State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Karimangalam, Dharmapuri District.

Crime No.80 of 2026

...Respondent/

Complainant Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS 2023/438 of Cr.P.C., to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in the event of his arrest, in Crime No.80 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Karimangalam Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

For Petitioner:

Mr.Vasudevan Bramalingam For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner/A2, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 123 of the Bharathiya Niyaya Sanhita (BNS) Act, 2023 and Section

7(2) of the Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 in Crime No.80 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in the illegal possession of 15 bags (each containing 15 kg) of tobacco products which worth about Rs.90,000/- (Rupees Ninety Thousand Only). Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner/A2 submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the de-facto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and he is ready to cooperate for investigation. 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 case and, upon instructions, submitted that no previous cases have been registered against the petitioner. However, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent.

6. Considering the large quantity of the tobacco products, this Court is of the view that the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17-03-2026 dk

To

1. The District Munsiff cum Judicial Magistrate, Karimangalam, Dharmapuri District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Karimangalam, Dharmapuri District.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

dk CRL OP No. 6821 of 2026 17-03-2026