Kumar v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police (L And O)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Kumar ..Petitioner Vs State Rep., by The Inspector of Police (L & O) T-24, Thirumudivakkam Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

(Crime No.80 of 2026) ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the accused/petitioner on bail pending investigation in T-24, Thirumudivakkam Police Station, Crime No.80 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner:

Mr.B.Ramesh Babu For Respondent:

Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.02.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 24(1) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA), 2003 and Section 123 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.80 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that based on secret information, the respondent police intercepted vehicles and recovered huge quantity of banned tobacco products weighing about 2657 kilograms. Hence, the case was registered.

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 and his name does not find place in the FIR and he has been implicated only based on confession. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 18.02.2026 and he is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent strongly opposed the bail application on the ground that the petitioner was involved in transportation of 2657 kgs of banned tobacco products and he has got two previous cases. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. Considering the submission of the learned counsel on either side, the nature of allegation and the quantity involved and also taking into account the previous cases of the petitioner, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of committing similar offences. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 15-04-2026 NSL To

1. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbadur.

2. Central Prison, Puzhal - II, Chennai.

3. The Inspector of Police (L & O), T-24, Thirumudivakkam Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 15-04-2026