Nilesh Kumar v. 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 Nilesh Kumar ..Petitioner Vs State, rep by.

The Inspector of Police, Maduranthakam Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

(Crime No 498 of 2025) ..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 his arrest in connection with Crime No. 498 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

For Petitioner:

Ms.Sasikala B For Respondent:

Mr.N.Palanivel Govt Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections Sections 123, 274 and 275 of B.N.S (Sections 328, 272 and 273 of I.P.C) read with Section 24(1) of Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 in Crime

No.498 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in possession of banned tobacco products (95 packets of Hans, 25 packets of cool lip, 156 packets of Vimal Pan Masala and 156 packets of Tobacco pieces). Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's name is not mentioned in FIR and he was not at all present in the scene of occurrence. He further submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that this is the 4th anticipatory bail application. He further submitted that this Court has already dealt with the above submission in the earlier application in Crl.OP.No.5482 of 2026 dated 04.03.2026. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, the submission of the learned Govt Advocate (Crl.Side) is liable to be accepted as this Court could not find any change in circumstances and hence, this Court is of the firm view that the Petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 02-06-2026 SHL To:

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Maduranthakam

2. The Inspector of Police, Maduranthakam Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

SHL 02-06-2026