Dismissed¶29

Mahendiran@ Mahendran v. The State Rep. by Inspector of Police

Madras HC24 Apr 2026/10360/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail REFUSED (petition dismissed) - Madras HC, CRL OP No. 10360 of 2026, order dated 24-04-2026 by C.KUMARAPPAN, J. Petitioners Mahendiran@ Mahendran and Arumugam sought bail under S. 482 BNSS fearing arrest in Crime No.30/2026 (PEW-Tindivanam PS, Villupuram District) for illegal possession of 86 bottles of brandy without licence, offences under Ss. 4(1)(C) & 14A, Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024. Refusal grounds: gravity of offences; second bail application with no change in circumstances after dismissal of earlier application on 26.03.2026. No precedent cases cited; no dissenting opinion.

What did the court decide?

Considering the gravity of the offences and the fact that there is no change in circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. ¶28

Mahendiran@ Mahendran Vs The State Rep. by Inspector of… — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CRL OP No. 10360 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 24-04-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶6

CRL OP No. 10360 of 2026

¶7

Mahendiran@ Mahendran

¶8

Arumugam

¶9

..Petitioner(s)

¶10

¶11

The State Rep. by Inspector of Police PEW - Tindivanam Police Station, Villupuram District, Crime No.30 /2026.

¶12

..Respondent(s)

¶13

Prayer: The Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.30 of 2026 by the respondent police.

¶14

For Petitioner(s): Mr.Muruganandham K For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Dhileepan, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The petitioners who apprehend arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 4(1)( C) and 14A of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024, in connection with Crime No.30 of 2026, seek anticipatory bail.

¶17

Page1 of 4

¶18

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

¶19

CRL OP No. 10360 of 2026

¶20

The case of the prosecution is that on 22.02.2026 at about 11 hours, during the routine patrol duty, when the respondent police intercepted a Tata

¶21

Indica Car bearing registration No.TN 11 E 5469 and enquired, they found the accused were in illegal possession of Majestic Brandy 90 ml – 46 bottles and Men’s Black Brandy 90 ml – 40 bottles without valid license or permission and hence, the case.

¶22

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court and prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶23

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioners were found in possession of 86 bottles of brandy and the same were recovered. He further submitted that this is the second anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioners and the earlier application has been dismissed by this Court very recently on 26.03.2026. He also submitted that there is no change in circumstances in the present application. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶24

Page2 of 4

¶25

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

¶26

CRL OP No. 10360 of 2026

¶27