Dismissed¶32

Kosu @ Vellaiyan v. State rep.by, Inspector of Police

Madras HC17 Mar 2026CRL OP/6779/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail denied; prohibition offence; Sections 4(1)(C), 4(1)(A) Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act; Crime No.68/2026, Chinnasalem Police Station, Kallakurichi District; 96 MC Lane brandy bottles and spirit; Section 482 B.N.S.S.; no previous cases; Madras High Court, C. Kumarappan J.; petition dismissed 17-03-2026.

What did the court decide?

Since the allegation arises from a prohibition case, the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail and the Court is not inclined to grant it. ¶30

Kosu @ Vellaiyan Vs State rep.by, Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CRL OP No.6779 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶6

CRL OP No. 6779 of 2026

¶7

Kosu @ Vellaiyan S/o.Sumdaram, No.878 Colony Main road, Thottiyam Village, Villupuram District - 606201.

¶8

...Petitioner/Accused (Sole)

¶9

¶10

State rep. by, Inspector of Police, Chinnasalem Police Station, Kallakurichi District. Crime No.68/2026.

¶11

..Respondent/ Complainant

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.68/2026 on the file of the respondent.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.Balachandran T

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The petitioner/accused, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences

¶17

under Sections 4(1)(C), 4(1)(A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition

¶18

Page1 of 4

¶19

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

¶20

CRL OP No.6779 of 2026

¶21

(Amendment) Act in Crime No.68 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

¶22

The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was involved in the illegal possession of 96 MC Lane brandy bottles and spirit. Hence, the case.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the de-facto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and he is ready to cooperate for investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶24

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that no previous cases have been registered against the petitioner. However, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶25