Allowed¶30

Mariselvam v. The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by The Inspector of Police

Madras HC25 Jun 2026CRL OP(MD)/12647/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court Madurai Bench 2026 quash petition allowed; charge sheet quashed in C.C.No.21 of 2026 Judicial Magistrate No.1 Virudhunagar; Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act Sections 4(1)(a), 4(1)(i) r/w Section 24; possession below permissible personal consumption limit (3.4 litres vs 4.5 litres); Tamil Nadu Liquor (Possession for Personal Consumption) Rules 1996; abuse of process of law; Section 528 BNSS Act 2023; Crime No.147 of 2024 West Police Station Virudhunagar; accused Mariselvam and Marikumar; Justice R.Vijayakumar.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the charge sheet in C.C.No.21 of 2026 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Virudhunagar; connected Miscellaneous Petitions (Crl.M.P(MD) Nos.12432 and 12433 of 2026) closed. ¶30

Mariselvam Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by The Inspector of Police — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the charge sheet in C.C.No.21 of 2026 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Virudhunagar; connected Miscellaneous Petitions (Crl.M.P(MD) Nos.12432 and 12433 of 2026) closed.

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether mere possession of liquor below the quantity permissible for personal consumption under the government Rules attracts the charged provisions of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, warranting quashing of the charge sheet.

¶18

Court's answer

Since the petitioners along with another person were in possession of only 3.4 litres, below the 4.5-litre entitlement under the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Possession for Personal Consumption) Rules, 1996, mere possession of the liquor bottles would not attract the provisions on which the petitioners had been charged.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

In view of the above facts, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners can only be an abuse of process of law.

¶27

Key takeaways

The Charge sheet in C.C.No.21 of 2026 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Virudhunagar, is hereby quashed.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (R.Vijayakumar, J., 25.06.2026) allows Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12647 of 2026, filed under Section 528 of BNSS Act, 2023 by Accused 1 and 2 (Mariselvam and Marikumar), and quashes the charge sheet in C.C.No.21 of 2026 (Judicial Magistrate No.1, Virudhunagar) arising from Crime No.147 of 2024, West Police Station, Virudhunagar, charging them under Sections 4(1)(a), 4(1)(i) r/w Section 24 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act. Per the charge sheet, the accused, along with another person, possessed 19 bottles of 180 ml 'Express Special Branch' liquor (total 3.4 litres) and Rs.4,560/-, allegedly attempting unlawful sale. Holding that the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Possession for Personal Consumption) Rules, 1996 permit possession of 4.5 litres for personal consumption, and that the quantity involved (3.4 litres) was below that limit, the Court concluded that mere possession would not attract the charged provisions, that continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an abuse of process of law, and quashed the charge sheet; connected Crl.M.P(MD) Nos.12432 and 12433 of 2026 were closed.

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12647 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 25.06.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

Crl.O.P(MD)No.12647 of 2026 and

¶7

Crl.M.P(MD) Nos.12432 and 12433 of 2026

¶8

Mariselvam 2. Marikumar ...Petitioners/ Accused 1 and 2 Vs 1. State Represented by The Inspector of Police, West Police Station, Virudhunagar District. (Crime No.147 of 2024) ... 1^st Respondent/ Complainant 2.S.Murugesan Sub-Inspector of Police, West Police Station, Virudhunagar District. ... 2^nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant

¶9

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS Act, 2023, praying this Court to call for records in C.C.No.21 of 2026 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Virudhunagar and quash the same.

¶10

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Balakrishnan

¶11

1/5

¶12

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

¶13

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12647 of 2026

¶14

For R1 : Mr.P.Samuel Gunasingh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The present petition has been filed by A1 and A2 in C.C.No.21 of 2026 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Virudhunagar, seeking to quash the charge sheet, wherein, the petitioners are charged with the offence under Sections 4(1) (a), 4 (1) (i) r/w Section 24 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act.

¶17

A perusal of the charge sheet reveals that the petitioners along with other person were in possession of the Express Special Branch 180 Ml of 19 bottles and they were also in possession of Rs.4,560/-. According to the charge sheet, they were attempting to unlawfully sell the total quantity of 3.4 litters of liquor.

¶18

According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, the accused persons were in possession of liquor bottles less than the what is permissible under the government Rules and therefore, prayed for quashing the charge sheet.

¶19

2/5

¶20

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

¶21

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12647 of 2026

¶22

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and perused

¶23

the materials available on record.

¶24

As per Tamil Nadu Liquor (Possession for Personal Consumption) Rules, 1996, the persons is entitled to be in possession of 4.5 liters for his personal consumption.

¶25

In the present case, the petitioners along with other person were found to have been in possession of 3.4 litres alone. In such circumstances, mere possession of the liquor bottles would not attract the provisions on which the petitioners had been charged.

¶26

In view of the above said facts, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners can only be an abuse of process of law. The Charge sheet in C.C.No.21 of 2026 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Virudhunagar, is hereby quashed.

¶27