VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Suresh v. The State of Tamilnadu

GRANTED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
25 June 2026
Bench
P.Dhanabalauthor
Case no.
CRL OP(MD) 12282/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow P.Dhanabal

Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 25.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 12282 of 2026 Suresh

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Nanguneri Police Station, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.304 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Boominathan

Advocate

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 304 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.06.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 24(1) and 6(a) of Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA) and Section 77 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, in Crime No.304 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on the vehicle check up the respondent police found that the petitioner is having 85.700 kilograms of tobacco products with an intention to sell the same near a School campus. Hence, the case.

¶3The 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. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The quantity of contraband is huge quantity. The petitioner has 7 previous cases, not similar in nature. Investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶5This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, considering the quantity involved in this case and though the petitioner has 7 previous cases, they are not similar in nature and in all those cases, he was granted bail and 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, Nanguneri, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of thirty days, thereafter as and when required for interrogation: [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 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 51730]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J)

25.06.2026 TM To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri.

2.The Inspector of Police, Nanguneri Police Station, Tirunelveli District. (Crime No.304 of 2026)

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Palayamkottai.

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

P. DHANABAL, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12282 of 2026 Date : 25.06.2026

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.