Prabakaran v. State By, the Inspector of Police,

ORDER The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 5, 7(3) of Lottery Regulation Act, 1998 r/w 318(4) of BNS, in connection with Crime No.910 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the accused were indulged in selling fake Lottery tickets to the public. Hence the case.

¶3Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused solely based on the confession of the co-accused and that custodial interrogation is not required in this case. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner, along with another accused, was involved in selling fake Lottery tickets to the public, which was banned by the Government of Tamil Nadu. He further submitted that there is no previous case against the petitioner. However, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the rival submissions on either side; nature of offences; the fact that there is no previous case against the petitioner and this petitioner was arrayed as accused only based on the confession statement of co-accused, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Poonamallee, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: [a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [b] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected; [c] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [f] 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]; [g] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023. 30-12-2025 AT Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To

1.State by, The Inspector of Police, Poonamallee Police Station, Tiruvallur District. Cr.No.910 of 2025.

2.The Judicial Magistrate No.2, Poonamallee. P.DHANABAL J. AT/HAM CRL OP No. 35776 of 2025 30-12-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-12-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Prabakaran S/o. Kannan, No.247, Kaaraipettai, Karai, Kanchipuram District - 631 552. Petitioner(s) Vs State by, The Inspector of Police, Poonamallee Police Station, Tiruvallur District. Cr.No.910 of 2025. Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): Mr. Silambu Selvan S For Respondent(s): Mr. S. Udaya Kumar, Government Advocate