Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6860 (MAD)

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

CRL OP/6779/2026 · 2026-03-17

C Kumarappan

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP No.6779 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 6779 of 2026 Kosu @ Vellaiyan S/o.Sumdaram, No.878 Colony Main road, Thottiyam Village, Villupuram District - 606201. ...Petitioner/Accused (Sole) Vs State rep. by, Inspector of Police, Chinnasalem Police Station, Kallakurichi District. Crime No.68/2026. ..Respondent/ Complainant 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. For Petitioner : Mr.Balachandran T For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioner/accused, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 4(1)(C), 4(1)(A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition __________ Page1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No.6779 of 2026 (Amendment) Act in Crime No.68 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent. __________ Page2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No.6779 of 2026 6. Considering the nature of the allegation against this petitioner as it arises from a prohibition case, he does not deserve any anticipatory bail. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17-03-2026 DK Copy to 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Chinnasalem. 2. The Inspector of Police, Chinnasalem Police Station, Kallakurichi District. 3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras. __________ Page3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No.6779 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. dk CRL OP No. 6779 of 2026 17-03-2026 __________ Page4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis