Siva @ Thamburan Siva v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Siva @ Thamburan Siva S/o Raja, No.19 A/40, Pudu Vaniyakula Street, Tiruvannamalai District.

2. Santhosh No.55a, Sivasakthivinayagar Kovil, Tiruvannamalai District ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai Town police station, Tiruvannamalai District.

(Crime No. 63 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioners on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police concerned in (crime No.63 of 2026 on the file of Inspector of police, Tiruvannamalai Town police station, Tiruvavannamalai District.) on our appearance before the concerned court and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

M/S. Kalaikumar S For Respondent(s):

Ms.R.S.Indira, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 123, 278, 62 of BNS (328, 276, 511 of IPC) r/w Section 77 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 in Crime No.63 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 24.02.2026, based on the secret information, the police party surrounded the accused persons and conducted an enquiry. During enquiry, they came to know that the accused persons were in possession of illegal drugs namely Tapentadol tablets 100 mg. The respondent police has recovered 78 strips (780 tablets) from the accused persons. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further

submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) reiterated the prosecution case and opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitoners.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available.

6. A perusal of the same reveals that this is case of supply of controlled substance to juveniles which is serious offence and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) has rightly objected to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner stoutly. I am fall in the line of the submission of learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), hence, considering the nature of serious allegation against this petitioner, this Court is of the firm view that it is not desirable to enlarge the Petitioners on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 02-06-2026 Vv To

1. The Judicial Magistrate-I, Tiruvannamalai

2. The Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai Town Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

VV 02-06-2026