Crl. O.P.(MD) No.13619 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.07.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR Crl.O.P(MD).No.13619 of 2026 and Crl.M.P(MD)No.13282 of 2026 Senthamarai@ Senthamarai Pandiyan ... Petitioner Vs 1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep., by the Inspector Of Police, Sivakasi East Police Station, Virudhunagar District, Crime No.210/2026. 2. V.Rabiyammal ... Respondents PRAYER: To call for the records pertaining to the crime no.210/2026 on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same in so far as these petitioner/accused no.1 concerned and pass such other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl. O.P.(MD) No.13619 of 2026 For petitioner : Mr.K.Krishnaperumal For R1 : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The present petition has been filed by A1 in Cr.No.210 of 2026, on the file of the 1st respondent police, seeking to quash the FIR, wherein he is alleged to have committed offences under sections 4(1)(C) and 4(1)(A) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024. 2. A perusal of the FIR reveals that A2 was found to be in possession of 4.860 liters of alcohol liquor purchased from the Tasmac Bar and during his confession, he is said to have stated that it was sold by A1 to him. 3. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner is not a license holder and he has never sold it to A2 and he further submitted that the regular police cannot file such FIR. It was also submitted that the complainant and the Investigating Officer are one and the same, and therefore, the registration of the FIR and the subsequent investigation are vitiated on that ground. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl. O.P.(MD) No.13619 of 2026 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the material records of the case. 5. As could be seen from the FIR, A1 has been implicated solely on the basis of the confession of A2. According to A2, he had purchased the liquor from A1. It has also been found that A2 was in possession of liquor in excess of the permissible limit prescribed for personal consumption. 6. In such circumstances, whether A1 has sold the same to A2 or not is the subject matter of investigation and in such circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in the present petition. Accordingly, criminal original petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 08.07.2026 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No rgm 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl. O.P.(MD) No.13619 of 2026 R.VIJAYAKUMAR , J. rgm To: 1. The Inspector of Police, Sivakasi East Police Station, Virudhunagar District, Crime No.210/2026. 2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Crl.O.P(MD).No.13619 of 2026 and Crl.M.P(MD)No.13282 of 2026 08.07.2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis