Vinoth v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Vinoth, S/o.Kuppan ... Petitioner Vs.

State, rep. by the Inspector of Police, PEW - Villupuram Police Station, Villupuram District.

(Cr.No.85 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in the hands of respondent in Cr.No.85 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Saranraj For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(aa) and 14A of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 read with Section 4(1)(B) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024, in Crime No.85 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was in possession of 200 bottles of 180 ml liquor. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is serious in nature. He further submitted that the petitioner has got on previous case. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the quantity of 200 bottles of 180 ml liquor recovered from the petitioner and on the fact that the petitioner is having one previous case, this Court is of the view that enlarging the petitioner on anticipatory bail would have a serious negative impact on society. Therefore, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail at this stage.

2/4

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 08.04.2026 mp To 1.The Inspector of Police, PEW - Villupuram Police Station, Villupuram District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

mp Crl.OP.No.8778 of 2026 08.04.2026 4/4