Pichamuthu Vs State rep.by,

Pichamuthu vs State rep.by,

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Mar 27, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1434061

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/1434061
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan
Decided On: Mar 27, 2026
Case Number: CRL OP/7612/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pichamuthu

Respondent

State rep.by,

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at madrasdated : 27.03.2026coramthe honourable mr. justice c.kumarappan 1.pichamuthu2. ramesh @ ramesh kumar ... petitionersvs. state represented by the inspector of police, crime no.536 of 2025 ... respondent prayer : criminal original petition filed under section 482 of the bharatiya nagarik suraksha sanhita, act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in the above cr.no.536 of 2025 on the file of the respondent. for petitioners : mr.t.m.ramalingam for respondent : mr.p.dhileepan government advocate (crl.side)orderthe petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under sections 4(1)(b) of tamil nadu prohibition (amendment) act, 2024 , in crime no.536 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.2. the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners was involved in illegal possession of 345 nos of brandy bottles each containing 180 ml. hence, the case.3. the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that thepetitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. he would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this court and hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.4. the learned government advocate (crl. side) would submit that the1st petitioner has one previous case and also submit that this is the third anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner and there is no change in circumstances.5. considering the fact that there is no change in circumstances from the earlier application, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.6. accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. sma to1. the inspector of police, 2.the public prosecutor, high court of madras. c.kumarappan.j. sma

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1.Pichamuthu

2. Ramesh @ Ramesh Kumar ... Petitioners

Vs. State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Crime No.536 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in the above Cr.No.536 of 2025 on the file of the respondent. For Petitioners : Mr.T.M.Ramalingam For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 4(1)(B) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 2024 , in Crime No.536 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners was involved in illegal possession of 345 Nos of brandy bottles each containing 180 ml. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the

1st petitioner has one previous case and also submit that this is the third anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner and there is no change in circumstances.

5. Considering the fact that there is no change in circumstances from the earlier application, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. sma To

1. The Inspector of Police, 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. C.KUMARAPPAN.J. sma

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties Pichamuthu vs State rep.by, Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan