Sivakozhundhu v. State Rep By Its, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14-05-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Sivakozhundhu W/o.Kolanchinadhan , 42, Thoppu street, Alichikudi sathukudi,viruthachalam, Cuddalore. 606110 ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep by its, Inspector of Police, Karuveppilankurichi Police Station, Cuddalore.

Crime No.300 of 2025 ..Respondent(s) Prayer : To enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of the arrest in Crime No.300 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent or on his appearance before the concerned Court to release him on bail and thus render justice. For Petitioner :

Ms.V.Vijayadharshini For Respondent :

Mr.S.Balaji Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Order The petitioner / Accused, who apprehends arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 4(1)(c) and 4(1)(A)

of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024 in connection with the Cr. No.300 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in possession of one 375 ml bottle and three 180 ml bottles of liquor, totalling to four bottles, allegedly intended for sale without valid licence. It is further alleged that after the closure of the TASMAC Shop, the accused used to procure small quantities of liquor bottles from TASMAC outlets and sell the same at a higher price for personal gain and hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the respondent police have registered a false case as against the petitioner and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that only based on the confession of the co-accused, the petitioner has been implicated as an accused in this case. Hence, the petitioner may be released on anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, while reiterating the prosecution case, strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that there is one previous case pending against the petitioner and the petitioner was granted bail in the said case.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side, considering the nature of offences, considering the fact that there is one previous case pending against this petitioner and in that case bail is granted to the petitioner, and also the fact that the petitioner is apprehending her implication solely based on the confession of the co-accused, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Virudhachalam, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent Police or the Police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further conditions that:

[a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

[b] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; [c] the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

14-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order MJS

Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Virudhachalam.

2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Karuveppilankurichi Police Station Virudhachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

P.DHANABAL J.

MJS 14-05-2026