[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Nilesh Kumar vs The State Rep. By Inspector Of Police on 20 April, 2026
CRL OP No. 9773 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
CRL OP No. 9773 of 2026
Nilesh Kumar
..Petitioner
Vs
The State Represented by its
Inspector of Police,
Ukkadam Police Station,
Coimbatore District.
(Crime No.64/2026) ..Respondent
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the Crime
No.64 of 2026 on the file of the respondent.
For Petitioner: Mr.Balaji Thirumoorthy
For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on
19.03.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 123 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and Section 7(1) and 20(1) of the Cigarettes and other Tobacco
Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and
Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 and Section 328 of
Indian Penal Code, 1860 in Crime No.64 of 2026 on the file of the respondent
police, seeks bail.
__________
Page1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused were found in
possession of 32.760 kgs of banned tobacco products. Hence, the case was
registered.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case without any
basis. It is submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since
19.03.2026 and that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation
and he will appear before the respondent police as and when required. The
learned counsel would further contend that the petitioner is ready to abide by
any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the
petitioner.
4. 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.
5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the
learned counsel on either side.
__________
Page2 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. 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 19.03.2026, this Court is inclined to grant bail, subject to certain
conditions.
7. 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 -V, Coimbatore, 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
at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and
when required for interrogation;
[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
__________
Page3 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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.
20-04-2026
NSL
Note:
1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official
Website of this Court.
2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official
Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To
be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this
Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.
To
1. The learned Judicial Magistrate-V, Coimbatore.
2. The Central Prison, Coimbatore.
3. The Inspector of Police, Ukkadam Police Station, Coimbatore District.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
__________
Page4 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
NSL
20-04-2026
__________
Page5 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
