Suresh @ Suresh Kumar v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.31170 of 2025 Suresh @ Suresh Kumar ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Sunguvarchatram, Kanchipuram District.

... Respondent (Crime No.344 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Cr.No.344 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Jeremiah For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

1/5

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 274, 275, 123 of BNS, 6 and 24(1) of COTPA Act 2003 and Section 77 of JJ Act 2015 and Section 7 r/w 9(ii) of TNPSS Act, 2003 in Cr.No.344 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner, joining hands with other accused, had illegally stored 900 kgs of banned tobacco products worth about Rs.7.25 lakhs. Based on secret information, the respondent police proceeded to the scene of occurrence and recovered the banned tobacco products from the accused persons, which led to the registration of the FIR and the present case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that no recovery was effected from the petitioner and that the statement of the coaccused merely alleges that the petitioner had collected and stored the banned tobacco products and directed others to distribute the same. Hence, 2/5

he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. On perusal of the records, it is revealed that a total of 900 kgs of contraband has been seized and it is also seen that the petitioner's wife has given a statement stating that her husband is the person who carried out the said activities.

7. In view of the above, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to 3/5

the petitioner, and if bail is granted it would hamper investigation.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 14.11.2025 Vv To

1. The Judicial Magistrate-I, Sriperumpudur.

2. The Inspector of Police, Sunguvarchatram, Kanchipuram District.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Vv 4/5

Crl.O.P.No.31170 of 2025 14.11.2025 5/5