Devarajan @ Mani v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Devarajan ... Petitioner Vs.

The Inspector of Police, CSCID Police Station, Namakkal District.

... Respondent (Crime No.28 of 2026) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest pending investigation in Crime No.28 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.Aneesh Vinayak For Respondent :

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 6(4) TN of Scheduled Commodities Act (RCDS) order 1982 r/w 7(1)(a)(ii) Essential Commodities Act, 1955, in Crime No.28 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the petitioner is that based on a secret information, the respondent police went to the petitioner's chicken feed mill and poultry farm 1/4

and found illegal possession of 30 bags weighing about 1500 kgs of Government public distribution rice. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and he is ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner was found to be an illegal possession of 30 bags weighing about 1500 kgs of Government public distribution rice and also he has got two previous cases. Hence, she opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent.

6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate 2/4

(Crl.Side) that the petitioner has got two previous cases and even the quantity mentioned in the First Information Report is 1500 kgs, this Court is of the view that whenever liberty was granted to the petitioner he misused by committing a similar offence. Therefore, it is not desirable to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 09.03.2026 ssi To:

1.The Inspector of Police, CSCID Police Station, Namakkal District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN , J.

ssi 3/4

09.03.2026 4/4