Venkatesan vs The State Rep. by The Inspector Of Police

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.09.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 123, 275 of BNS Act and Section 6(a), 24(1) of Cigarettes and other Tobacco Products Act, 2003, in Crime No.243 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in illegal possession of 1.932 kgs of banned tobacco products in the shop. Hence, the case was registered.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case without any basis. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner was found in possession of banned tobacco products and that there is no previous cases pending against the petitioner. However, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this Court is of the view that though the petitioner was found in possession of banned tobacco products, there are no previous cases pending against him. Further, taking into account that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 04.09.2026, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Polur, Tiruvannamalai District, and subject to the following conditions:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.