High Court · 2025

CRL OP (MD) No.7029 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )Date : 21.04.2025PRESENTTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVELCRL OP (MD) No.7029 of 2025Balasubramani@ Balasubramaniyan... Petitioner/Accused No.3 Vs.The State of Tamil NaduRep. by the Inspector of Police,Kattuputhur Police Station,Trichy District.Crime No.77 of 2025... Respondent/ComplainantFor Petitioner: Mr.N.Balasubramanian AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSSPRAYER :-For bail in Crime No.77 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7029 of 2025ORDER : The Court made the following order :-This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 16.04.2025under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying togrant bail.2. The petitioner / A3 was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on30.03.2025 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 123 of Bharatiya NyayaSanhita (BNS), 2023 and Sections 6 and 24(1) of Cigarette and Other Tobacco ProductsAct, 2003, in Crime No.77 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police.3. The case of the prosecution is that, on 30.03.2025, during a routine vehiclecheck-up near Chathipatti Junction, the respondent-police intercepted a vehiclebearing Registration No.TN-48-BT-2046. Upon conducting a search, they found thatAccused No.1 was illegally transporting banned tobacco products, namely, onegunny bag of Hans and one gunny bag of Cool Lip. Subsequently, the respondent-police, along with Accused No.1, proceeded to Seethapatti, where it was discoveredthat Accused No.1, along with Accused No.4, had hidden additional banned tobaccoproducts, namely, 40 gunny bags, each containing 300 grams of 50 Hans packets, 62/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7029 of 2025gunny bags, each containing 100.8 grams of 57 Cool Lip packets, 26 gunny bags, eachcontaining 75 grams of 52 Vimal Tobacco packets, and 26 gunny bags, eachcontaining 10.5 grams of 52 V1 Tobacco packets. The respondent-police arrestedAccused No.1 and seized the banned tobacco products along with the vehicle inquestion. Based on the confession of Accused No.1, the petitioner and otherindividuals were arrayed as accused in this case. Hence, the case.4. Mr.N.Balasubramanian, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitsthat the petitioner did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution and thathe has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner hasbeen in judicial custody since 30.03.2025 and is ready to abide by any condition thatmay be imposed by this Court. He therefore prays to grant bail to the petitioner.5. Per contra, Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side)appearing for the respondent-police, submits that the petitioner is running a groceryshop, from which the respondent-police recovered 20.7 kg of banned tobaccoproducts. He further submits that, in this case, a total of 850 kg of banned tobaccoproducts has been recovered from the accused persons. He also submits that thepetitioner has no previous cases. However, considering the gravity of the offence, hestrongly opposes for grant of bail to the petitioner.3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7029 of 20256. Heard on both sides andhas perused the records.7. The petitioner is running a grocery shop, and 20.7 kg of banned tobaccoproducts was recovered from the said shop. The petitioner has no previous cases. Hewas arrested on 30.03.2025 and has been in judicial custody since then. In view of theoffences allegedly committed by the petitioner and taking note of the fact that thebanned tobacco products and the vehicle have already been seized by therespondent-police, this Court is of the opinion that further custody of the petitioner isnot necessary for the Investigation Agency in this case. Further, the petitioner haspermanent residence and deep roots in the society. Therefore, there is less possibilityof absconding. Considering the same and also considering the period of incarcerationsuffered by him and with a view to give one more opportunity to the petitioner toreform himself, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, however, subjectto certain conditions. Accordingly, bail is granted to the petitioner subject to thefollowing conditions:(i) The 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/- (Rupees4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7029 of 2025Twenty Five Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate,Thottiyam, Trichy District;(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, Thottiyam, Trichy District shallobtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity;(iii) The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile number tothe learned Judicial Magistrate, Thottiyam, Trichy District;(iv) The petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent-Police daily at10.00 a.m. and 05.00 p.m., until further orders;(v) The petitioner shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond tobe executed under Chapter XXXV of BNS, 2023;(vi) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which heis accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7029 of 2025(vii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threator promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade himfrom disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with theevidence; and(viii) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned JudicialMagistrate, Thottiyam, Trichy District is entitled to pass appropriate orders againstthe petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions areimposed by him as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State ofKerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283].8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to theconditions stated supra. sd/- 21/04/2025 / TRUE COPY / 22/04/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III / IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. MBI6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP (MD) No.7029 of 2025TO1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATETHOTTIYAM, TRICHY DISTRICT.2 DO THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATETRICHY DISTRICT.3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,KATTUPUTHUR POLICE STATION,,TRICHY DISTRICT.4 THE SUPERINTENDENT,CENTRAL PRISON, TRICHY.5 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.7029 of 2025 Date :21/04/2025 SS/SAR- /22/04/2025/ 7P/6CMadurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 7/7