Mohan v. The State Rep By, The Sub-Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Mohan S/o. Anandhan, No. 13/13, Vazhaikollai Colony,Bhuvanagiri Post,Cuddalore District

2. Silambarasan S/o. Ramalingam, 54/21-53, Vazhaikollai Colony, Bhuvanagiri Post, Bhuvanagiri Taluk, Cuddalore District.

..Petitioner(s) Vs The State represented by:

The Sub-Inspector Of Police Bhuvanagiri Police Station, Cuddalore.

[Crime No.58 of 2026] ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police concerned in Crime No.58 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s):

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

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

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 4(1)(c) and 14(A) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act 2024 in Crime No.58 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.04.2026 at about 7 a.m., during vehicle check up, conducted by the Election Flying Squad near Bharat Petroleum Petrol Bunk, Keezhbhuvanagiri, a Car bearing Registration No.TN91-AA-2902 was intercepted by the police. During the search, Puducherry liquor bottles were found inside the vehicle and the occupants of the vehicle were escaped from the spot. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have nothing to do with the commission of offence as alleged by the prosecution. The learned counsel would further submit that they were not available at the place of occurrence and they are ready and willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police strongly objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner by reiterating the prosecution case and stating that they, each have six previous cases.

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

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and bad antecedents of the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17-06-2026 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.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MJS To

1. The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Portonovo (Parangipettai).

2. The Sub-Inspector Of Police Bhuvanagiri Police Station, Cuddalore.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 17-06-2026