R Amulraj v. State Of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By The Sub-Inspector Of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. R Amulraj S/o Rathinam, No- 55 Maikaval Street, Chidambaram Post, Cuddalore District - 608001. and another 2.B Prabakaran S/o Bose, Old No,5, New No 18/3, PERIYAVANIYA Street, Chidambaram Cuddalore District - 608001 Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Sub-Inspector of KILLAI Police Station, Cuddalore District. (Crime No.104 of 2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the Petitioners/1st Accused/ 3 Accused on Anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. 104 /2025 on the file of the Respondent police and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Manivasagan M S.Jainey For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 275, 123 of BNS r/w.section 24(1) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act 2003 in Crime No.104 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners were found to be involved in the illegal transportation of banned Tobacco Products worth about Rs.30,000/-. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have not committed the offences alleged by the defacto complainant. He also submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide with any conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and therefore, he prayed to grant

anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, reported that earlier these petitioner No.1 was arrested and produced before the Judicial Magistrate-I, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District and no remand was ordered by the Judicial Magistrate. It is further submitted that 2 nd petitioner is not an accused in this crime number.

5. Considering the above submission of the learned Government Advocate [crl.side] and taking into fact that the petitioner No.1 already arrested and no remand was ordered by the concerned magistrate, I am of the view that there is no apprehension of arrest at present. As far as petitioner No.2 is concerned, since he is not an accused in the said crime number, this petition for anticipatory bail does not survive.

6.With the observation, this Criminal Original Petition is closed. 25-09-2025 mpa Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Chidambaram, Cuddalore District. 2.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the SubInspector of KILLAI Police Station, Cuddalore District. (Crime No.104 of 2025) 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

mpa CRL OP No. 26550 of 25-09-2025