Rajakumaran v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Rajakumaran

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Rameswaram Town Police Station Ramanathapuram.

(Crime No. 66 of 2026 )

...Respondent

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sivaprakash 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. 66 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

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 4(1)(A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024 in Crime No. 66 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 18.03.2026 at about 8.45 p.m., when the defacto complainant, along with his team, was on patrol, they found that A1 was in illegal possession of 90 liquor bottles each containing 180 m.l. Based on his confession, the petitioner has been arrayed as A2. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that based on the confession only, the petitioner has been arrayed as accused and no recovery was made from this petitioner. He would further submit that A1 was arrested and released on bail. Hence, he prayed to grant Anticipatory 2/6

Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 4(1)(A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024 in Crime No. 66 of 2026. He would further submit that the petitioner has three previous cases, which are not similar in nature. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and considering the facts that the quantity of liquor involved in this case and based on the confession only, the petitioner has been arrayed as accused and no recovery was made from this petitioner and also A1 was arrested and released on bail and also considering the facts that though the petitioner 3/6

has three previous cases, the same are not similar in nature and in all cases the petitioner was granted 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, Rameswaram, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, on 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. 4/6

[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.

(P D B J) 30.04.2026 apd To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Rameswaram.

2.The Inspector of Police, Rameswaram Town Police Station Ramanathapuram.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J apd

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 8797 of 2026 Date : 30.04.2026 6/6