Dismissed¶30

K Bakkiyaraj v. State rep by The Inspector of Police

ANTICIPATORY BAIL – Section 482, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Madras HC17 Jun 2025/17064/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail refused; CRL OP NO. 17064 of 2025; High Court of Judicature at Madras; M. Nirmal Kumar, J.; decided 17-06-2025; Section 482 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; Section 4(1)(c) and 4(1-A)(II) Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024; illegal sale of 10 litres ID arrack; PEW-Attur Police Station; Salem District; Crime No.16 of 2025; petitioner K.Bakkiyaraj; State rep by Inspector of Police PEW-Attur; custodial interrogation not required contended; Criminal Original Petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail is refused: considering the nature of the offence and the fact that the petitioner has illegally sold 10 litres of ID arrack, the Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. ¶27

K Bakkiyaraj Vs State rep by The Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CRL OP NO. 17064 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-06-2025

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

¶4

CRL OP NO. 17064 of 2025

¶5

K.Bakkiyaraj S/o. Kullan, No.100, Kaniyan Valavu, Kunnur, Attur, Salem District-636 138

¶6

Petitioner(s)

¶7

¶8

State rep by The Inspector of Police, PEW-Attur Police Station, Salem District. (Crime No.16/2025)

¶9

Respondent(s)

¶10

Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.16 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent police.

¶11

For Petitioner(s):

¶12

Mr.Suresh Sakthi Murugan Mr.R.Vinoth Raja Government Advocate (Criminal side)

¶13

For Respondent(s):

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the

¶16

offences punishable under Section 4 (1) (c) and 4 (1-A) (II) of the Tamil Nadu

¶17

Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024, in Crime No.16 of 2025, on the file of the

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶20

2.The case of the prosecution is that, on 18.01.2025 at about 09.a.m., the respondent Police found one unknown person standing with 10 litter white colour plastic can. On seeing them, the unknown person escaped from that place. On investigation, it was found that the petitioner is the accused person. Hence the case.

¶21

3.The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, he prays for

¶22

grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶23

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police,

¶24

while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the petitioner had sold 10 litres of ID Arrack.

¶25

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate

¶26

(Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

¶27

6.Considering the nature of the offence and the fact that the petitioner has illegally sold

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

10 litres of ID arrack, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the

¶30

petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.