Karuppasamy v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Amathur
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 01/04/2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No.6332 of 2026 Karuppasamy ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Amathur Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
(Crime No.119 of 2026) ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.119 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Uthaya Kumar, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 123 of BNS Act r/w 6(b) and 24(1) of Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act, 2003, in Crime No.119 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that on 21.03.2026, at about 10.00 a.m., the respondent police received a secret information and went to the place of occurrence and intercepted the vehicle bearing Reg.No.TN-84-D-5919 and found illegal possession of 400 pockets of tobacco products. Hence, a case has been registered against the accused for the aforesaid offences. Hence, this petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and has was falsely implicated in this case and he has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that no recovery was made from the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that no recovery was made from the petitioner and already A2 and A3 2/6
were arrested and remanded to judicial custody and the petitioner has 2 previous cases. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, he fairly conceded that in that cases, he was released on bail and no recovery was made from the petitioner.
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 petitioner, and no recovery was made from the petitioner and already A2 and A3 were arrested and remanded to judicial custody and thought the petitioner has 2 previous cases, in that cases, he was released on bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to 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 learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Viruthunagar, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the Sattur Police Station daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of 3/6
similar nature.
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioner 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 petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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)AIR SCW 5560]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
01.04.2026 dss 4/6
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Viruthunagar.
2.The Inspector of Police, Amathur Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
P. DHANABAL,J dss
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.6332 of 2026 Date : 01/04/2026 6/6