G.Abimani v. The State Represented By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.25371 of 2025 G.Abimani ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, North Police Station, Tiruppur District.

... Respondent (Cr.No.1028 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in connection with Cr.No.1028 of 2025 on the file of the North Police Station, Tiruppur.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Balaji For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/4

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.09.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 123 of BNS, 2023 and Section 22(a) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 in Crime No.1028 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in possession of 13.200 kgs of banned tobacco products in order to sell the same to public at large to make an unlawful gain through illegal means Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the banned tobacco products were seized. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

2/4

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

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the nature of offence charged against the petitioner and also taking note of the fact that the huge quantity of contraband was seized, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 16.09.2025 Vv To

1. The Judicial Magistrate-I, Krishnagiri.

2. The Inspector of Police, Krishnagiri Town Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Vv Crl.O.P.No.25371 of 2025 16.09.2025 4/4