Shahul Hameed v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Ariyamangalam

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 27/04/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Shahul Hameed ... Petitioner/Accused No.3 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Ariyamangalam Police Station, Trichy District.

Crime No.77/2026. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.77/2026 on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner : Lenin K, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, 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, 2023, 6(a), 24(1), COTPA Act and Section 77 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, in Crime No.77 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 04.04.2026, on secret information, the respondent police went to the main entrance of S.I.T ground and found two persons with white plastic bag and on searching, they were in illegal possession of 300 grams of Hans in 8 packets and 20 grams of Hans in 9 packets and based on their confession, case was registered against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the co-accused (A1 & A2) were already arrested and released on bail and no previous case is pending against the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the offence committed by the petitioner is grave in nature and the investigation is still pending and hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, he fairly conceded that the co-accused were already arrested and released on bail and the petitioner has no previous case.

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 the quantity involved in this case and the the co-accused were already arrested and released on bail and the petitioner has no previous case, 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 3/6

two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Trichy, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of 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]. 4/6

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

27.04.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Trichy, 2.The The Inspector of Police, Ariyamangalam Police Station,Trichy 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.8154 of 2026 Date : 27/04/2026 6/6