Ganesan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thangachimadam
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.Ganesan 2.Malaisamy ..Petitioners/A2 & A3 Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thangachimadam Police Station Ramanathapuram District.
(Crime No. 14 of 2026)
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioners :Mr.C.Susikumar Advocate.
For Respondent :Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 14 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
1/8
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A2 & A3, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(c) and 14(A) of Tamilnadu Prohibition Act, in Crime No.14 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.03.2026, during vehicle check up, the respondent Police found that the petitioner and other accused were in illegal possession of 170 brandy bottles of liquor without getting any permission or licence. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above 2/8
said incident. He would further submit the based on the confession of co-accused, they have been arrayed as accused in this case and the coaccused was granted bail. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the first petitioner has four previous cases and the second petitioner has three previous cases. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, as the investigation is pending.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners and the co-accused was 3/8
released on bail and based on the confession of co-accused, they have been arrayed as accused and also considering the fact that though the petitioners have previous cases, in all cases, they were released on bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:
[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Rameswaram, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police once in a week ie., on Every Saturday at 10.30 4/8
a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.
[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the 5/8
petitioners 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)AIR SCW 5560].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
(P D B J) 27.03.2026 vsg To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Rameswaram.
2.The Inspector of Police, Thangachimadam Police Station Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/8
7/8
P. DHANABAL, J., vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6061 of 2026 Date : 27.03.2026 8/8