MANI Vs State rep by

MANI vs State rep by

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 12, 2026

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1415660

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1415660
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice K.Rajasekar
Decided On: Jan 12, 2026
Case Number: CRL OP/906/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

MANI

Respondent

State rep by

Excerpt

.....submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner and the petitioner illegally transported 4 kgs of banned tobacco products without proper permission. hence, he strongly opposes grant of bail to the petitioner.5. considering the above fact and circumstances of the case and alsotaking note of the fact that the property has been recovered and there are no previous cases against the petitioner, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.6. accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on hisexecuting a bond for a sum of rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned judicial magistrate-iv, coimbatore, and on further conditions that:- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the magistrate may obtain a copy of their aadhar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks. [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 aforesaid conditions, the learned magistrate/trial court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned magistrate/trial court himself, as laid down by the hon'ble supreme court in p.k.shaji vs. state of kerala [(2005)air scw 5560]; [f] if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh fir can be registered under section 269 b.n.s. 12-01-2026 mpa index:yes/nospeaking/non-speaking orderinternet:yes neutral citation:yes/no 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 beinguploaded in official.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Mani

S/o.Arunachalam, No.2/230, Karaikudi, Devakottai, Thiruvegampet, Sivagangai Distirct. Now residing at Ponkaliamman Koil Street, Rathinapuri, Coimbatore District. Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State rep by The Inspector of Police, C3-Sai Baba Colony Police Station, Coimbatore District. Crime No.4 of 2026 Respondent(s)

PRAYER To enlarge the petitioner on bail concerned in Crime No.4 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent, on such terms and conditions and as this Honble Court. For Petitioner(s): M.N.Balakrishnan For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate(Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.01.2026 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 24(1) of Cigarette and Other Tobacco Products Act 2003 and section 77 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 in Crime No.4 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of prosecution is that the petitioner was found in possession of 4 kgs of banned tobacco products and the respondent police have seized the property. Hence this case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner was arrested and he is in judicial custody from 03.01.2026 and ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for

respondent would submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner and the petitioner illegally transported 4 kgs of banned tobacco products without proper permission. Hence, he strongly opposes grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the above fact and circumstances of the case and also

taking note of the fact that the property has been recovered and there are no previous cases against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his

executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-IV, Coimbatore, and on further conditions that:- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks. [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 aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. 12-01-2026 Mpa Index:Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No 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 Judicial Magistrate-IV, Coimbatore. 1.State rep by The Inspector of Police, C3-Sai Baba Colony Police Station, Coimbatore District. Crime No.4 of 2026 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. K.RAJASEKAR J. mpa 12-01-2026

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2026 Same Parties MANI vs State rep by Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice K.Rajasekar