Krishnasamy v. State of Tamil Nadu rep. byThe Inspector of Police
Case at a glance
- Bench
- L VICTORIA GOWRI
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 6561 of 20266. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and considering the quantity involved in this case and…
Judgment
Cause title
CRL OP(MD). No. 6561 of 2026BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 02.04.2026PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRICRL OP(MD). No. 6561 of 2026 Krishnasamy ...Petitioner
/A1VsState of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police,M.Pudupatti Police Station, Virudhunagar District. (Crime No.41 of 2026) ...Respondent
/Complainant For Petitioner: Mr.R.Jagadeeshwaran Advocate. For Respondent: Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSSPRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 41 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 6561 of 2026
ORDER :
The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 123 of BNS r/w Section 6(b) r/w 24(1) of the Cigerettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 in Crime No. 41 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant used to purchase tobacco product from the petitioner's tea shop. It is alleged that the petitioner sold Ganesh Tobacco to the defacto complainant for a sum of Rs.60/-. After consuming the same, the defacto complainant allegedly fainted and subsequently, found that the petitioner sold expired tobacco product to him. Later, he lodged a complaint before the respondent police. Hence the case. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 6561 of 20263. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the tobacco products were seized from the petitioner and he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.03.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.
The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner has one previous case. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 6561 of 20266. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and considering the quantity involved in this case and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on 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, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD).
No. 6561 of 2026[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the 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 dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [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 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 6561 of 2026petitioner 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 BNS. 02.04.2026RmkTo1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Sivakasi. 2. The Officer-incharge Sub Jail, Virudhunagar. 3. The Inspector of Police,M.Pudupatti Police Station, Virudhunagar District. 4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No. 6561 of 2026L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J Rmk ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6561 of 2026 Date : 02.04.20267/7
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.