Raja v. State Rep. By Its The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.08.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Raja ... Petitioner Vs.
The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Magudamchavadi Police Station, Salem.
(Crime No.197 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest at the hands of the respondent Police pending investigation in Crime No.197 of 2025 on the file of respondent Police. For Petitioner :
Mr.S.Senthilvel For Respondent :
Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
O R D E R
1/6
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 7(3) of the Lotteries Regulation Act, 1998 in Crime No.197 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent Police submits that during the vehicle check up, on 29.05.2025, at about 11.00 a.m., the Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Magudamchavadi Police Station found three persons in suspicious behaviour and when they tried to apprehend them, two of them run away and a person whom they caught hold has disclosed his name as Karuppannan and from him, the banned lotteries (ten in number) along with Rs.300/-, being the sale proceeds, were recovered. On his confession, they came to know that the banned lotteries were supplied by one Raja, who is the petitioner herein.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that there is no nexus between Karuppannan/A1 from whom the banned lotteries were seized and the petitioner and he is no way connected to the present case. 2/6
4. Heard the learned counsels and perused the materials available on record.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either sides and the fact that only based on the confession of the accused, the petitioner has been suspected, it is appropriate to grant him anticipatory bail with conditions.
6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, on or before 02.09.2025 before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Sankari, 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 and on further condition that:
[a] if the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate on or before 02.09.2025, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;
[b] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one 3/6
of the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [c] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police as and when required;
[d] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283]; [e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
20.08.2025 ssb 4/6
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Sankari.
2.The Inspector of Police, Magudamchavadi Police Station, Salem.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
5/6
Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
ssb 20.08.2025 6/6