Arumuga Nainar @ Man v. State Represented By The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14-08-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN Arumuga Nainar @ Mani S/o. Sudalaiyandi, No.22, Kovilpathu PeriYa Street, Kalakad, Nanguneri Tirunelveli District - 627 501 Petitioner(s) Vs State Represented by The Inspector of Police, PEW, Madurantakam Police Station, Madurantakam.
Crime.No.278/2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.278 of 2025 on the file of Respondent police.
For Petitioner(s):
M/s.P M Nisha For Respondent(s):
Mr. S. Udayakumar, Government Advocate (Crl.side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(B) and 4(1)(A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment Act) 2024 (4(1)(b) and 4(1)(a) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 in Crime No. 278 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that when the respondent police made a liquor check up on train and recovered 75 bottles of liquor each containing 750ml and a cash of Rs.1,100/- from A1 and A2. Based on the confession of A1, the petitioner has been implication. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He also submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to furnish sufficient solvent sureties for his release. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submits that two previous cases were pending against the petitioner which are similar in nature. Hence,he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. The petition for anticipatory bail filed by the absconding accused who has been implicated by the accused A1 and A2 from whom 75 bottles of brandy have been seized while they were carrying in train. From the statement of the accused persons, it reveals that they were carrying the contraband to be supplied to one Arumuga Nainar @ Mani at Chennai/ the petitioner herein and the person who supplied to A1 and A2 and engaged them for transporting illicit arrack is one Mohanakrishnan. The respondent police is in search of this petitioner herein who is the person who engaged the A1 and A2 for procuring the contraband seized. Due to his abscondence, the respondent police is not able to proceed further in investigation and probe about the chain involving illicit trafficking of IMFL from Pondicherry to Tamil Nadu.
6. In view of the above said fact, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.
14-08-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes nr To
1. The Inspector of Police, PEW, Madurantakam Police Station, Madurantakam.
2. The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras
Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN J.
nr 14-08-2025