High Court · 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 20/03/2025PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVELCRL OP (MD) No.5083 of 20251.Vijay, S/o.Sekar, Vadakkalur, Avudaiyarkovil Taluk, Pudukkottai District.2.Mohammed Sabibulla, S/o.Naina Mohammed, Middle Street, West Maruthuvakudi, Thiruvidaimaruthur, Pudukkottai District. ... Petitioners/A1 & A2 VsThe State of Tamil Nadu,Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Mimisal Police Station, Pudukkottai District. Crime No.24/2025 ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners: Mr.Gurumoorthy S, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSSPRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.24 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ORDER : The Court made the following order :-This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners on 18.03.2025under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying togrant an order of bail.2. The petitioners were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.03.2025for the offences punishable under Section 123 of BNS r/w Sections 6(a) and 24(1) ofCigarette and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003, in Crime No.24 of 2025 on the file ofthe respondent-police.3. The case of the prosecution is that on 01.03.2025, at about 11.00 a.m., thedefacto complainant, Sub-Inspector of Police, along with his police team, wasconducting a search in the shop of the first petitioner/Accused No.1. At that point intime, the respondent-police noticed that the first petitioner/A1 was illegally inpossession of banned tobacco products, i.e., 40 packets of hans (each containing 300gms) and 8 packets of cool lip packets (each containing 100 gms) in a white-coloredgunny bag. Based on the confession of the petitioner/Accused No.1, the secondpetitioner/Accused No.2 has been implicated in this case. The police team arrestedthe petitioners/A1 and A2 and seized the prohibited tobacco products. Hence, thecomplaint.2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4. Mr.S.Gurumoorthy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitsthat the petitioners have nothing to do with the alleged offence and that a false casehas been foisted against the petitioners. He however submits that they are ready toabide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He further submits thatthe petitioners have been in judicial custody since 01.03.2025. Hence, he prays togrant bail to the petitioners.5. Per contra, Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, learned Government Advocate (CriminalSide) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that the petitioners were found inillegal possession of 12.800 kgs of banned tobacco products. He further submits thatthere is no previous case against the first petitioner, and there are three previouscases against the second petitioner, which all are similar in nature. He further submitsthat if bail is granted to the petitioners, they may commit similar offence, andendanger the health of the general public. He further submits that the firstpetitioner/Accused No.1 purchased the banned tobacco products from the secondpetitioner/Accused No.2, who purchased the said contraband from Bangalore.Therefore, he vehemently opposes to grant bail to the petitioners.6. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records.7. It is seen that the second petitioner has three previous cases and all the casesare similar to the present case. In view of the same, this Court is of the opinion that if3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis bail is granted to the second petitioner, he will commit the similar offence once again.Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the second petitioner. 8. As far as the first petitioner is concerned, the first petitioner has permanentresidence and deep roots in the society. Therefore, there is less possibility ofabsconding. Considering the same, and also considering the period of incarcerationsuffered by the first petitioner, and taking note of the fact that there is no previouscase pending against him, and with a view to give an opportunity to the firstpetitioner to reform himself, this Court is inclined to grant an order of bail to the firstpetitioner, however, subject to the following conditions:(i) The first petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty FiveThousand only) along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.25,000/- (RupeesTwenty Five Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate,Manamelkudi;(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in theApplication for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules ofPractice, 2019']. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Manamelkudi shall obtain a copy ofany one of identity proofs to ensure their identity;(iii) The first petitioner shall attend in accordance with the conditions of thebond to be executed under Chapter XXXV of BNS, 2023;4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (iv) The first petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of he isaccused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;(v) The first petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuadehim from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with theevidence;(vi) The first petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile numberto the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manamelkudi;vii) The first petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent-police dailyat 10.30 a.m., until further orders;(viii) The first petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, cause any threat to thedefacto complainant and witnesses; and (ix) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, learned JudicialMagistrate, Manamelkudi, is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the firstpetitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions are imposed byhim as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala[(2005) 13 SCC 283].5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

9. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed insofar as thesecond petitioner is concerned and stands allowed in respect of the first petitionersubject to the conditions stated supra. sd/- 20/03/2025 / TRUE COPY / 21/03/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar () Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TSGTO1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MANAMELKUDI2 DO-THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PUDUKOTTAI DISTRICT.3 THE OFFICER INCHARGE, SUB JAIL, ARANTHANGI.4 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MIMISAL POLICE STATION, PUDUKKOTTAI DISTRICT. 5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.5083 of 2025 Date :20/03/20256/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis NBF/GSV / SAR/ (21/03/2025) 7P/6CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/20237/7