Prem v. The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12-03-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.O.P.No.5858 of 2026 Prem S/o. Selvaraj, 5/505 C, Opposite CTC, Karamadai Road, Mettupalayam, Coimbatore - 641 301.
..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, CSCID, Coimbatore.
(Cr.No.56/2026) ..Respondent(s) Crl.O.P.No.6363 of 2026 M.Manokaran S/o. Manickam, Viveganantha Theru, Sivanpuram Colony, Karamadai, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coimbatore District- 641104.
..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, CSCID, Coimbatore.
(Crime No.55 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) CRL OP No. 6364 of 2026
Boopalan S/o. Manokaran, No. 31, Vivekanandar Street, Sivanpuram Colony, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coimbatore District- 641301.
..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, CSCID, Coimbatore.
(Crime No.55 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) CRL OP No. 6365 of 2026 M.Manokaran S/o.Manickam, Viveganantha Theru, Sivanpuram Colony, Karamadai, Mettupalayam Taluk, Coimbatore District-641104.
..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep.by, The Inspector of Police, CSCID, Coimbatore.
Cr.No.56 of 2026.
..Respondent(s) CRL OP No. 6366 of 2026 Boopalan S/o.Manokaran, No.31, Vivekanandar Street, Sivanpuram Colony, Metttupalayam Taluk, Coimbatore District - 641301 ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep. by
The Inspector of Police, CSCID, Coimbatore.
Crime No.56 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER in Crl.O.P.Nos. 5858, 6365 & 6366 of 2026 : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioners on Anticipatory Bail in the event of their arrest by the Respondent/Complainant in Cr. No.56 of 2026 on the file the Respondent Police. PRAYER in Crl.O.P.Nos. 6363 & 6364 of 2026 : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police in connection with Crime No. 55 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice.
For Petitioner in Crl.O.P.Nos.6364, 6363, 6365 & 6366 of 2026:
Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz For Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.5858 of 2026:
Pa. Saigovindaraja For Respondent in all Crl.O.Ps.:
Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) COMMON ORDER The petitioners in Crl.O.P.Nos: 6363 and 6364 of 2026, apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 19(c)(v) and 25 of Fertilizer Control Order, 1985 r/w. 7(1)(a)(ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1985 in Crime No.55 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.
The petitioners in Crl.O.P.Nos: 5858, 6365 and 6366 of 2026, apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 19(c)(v) and 25 of Fertilizer Control Order, 1985 r/w. 7(1)(a)(ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1985 in Crime No.56 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that, the accused persons attempted to transport essential commodities, namely Bharath urea, in contravention of the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act. It is alleged that about 220 tonnes and 310 tonnes of Bharath Urea were attempted to be transported by A1 to A3 for the purpose of selling the same to the concern belongs to A4 to A6. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioners are ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the investigation in this case is pending and there is no previous case pending
against the petitioners. Hence, opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available.
6. From the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner in this matter, it appears that this is a case relating to an attempt to transport essential commodities in contravention of the Act. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would strongly oppose the anticipatory bail petition and would contend that the seized urea, called Bharath urea, weighing about 220 tonnes and 310 tonnes, was attempted to be transported by A1 to A3 in order to sell the same to the concern belongs to A4 to A6.
7. However, the said contention was strongly objected to by the learned counsel for the petitioner, who would submit that insofar as A2 is concerned, he is only the owner of the lorry and he is no way connnected with the purchase or sale of the said urea. Without knowing anything about the same, the driver had simply loaded the said urea, and at that time the police recovered all the commodities. Therefore, no further custodial interrogation is necessary.
8. At this juncture the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners A5
and A6 would vehemently contend that the co-accused have already been released on bail. However, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would strongly oppose the same and would submit that A7, one Mrs.Tamilselvi, was released on bail by the Sessions Court only on the ground that she is a woman and that she was merely a sleeping partner holding 5% share.
9. Now the fact remains that the entire subject material has already been recovered by the police and the punishment for the offence under the Essential Commodities Act ranges between 3 month to 7 years. Considering the said position and also taking into consideration the fact that the incident took place on 27.02.2026, no custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required. It is also relevant to mention that there is no previous case against the petitioners. Therefore, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions.
10. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Coimbatore, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:
(a) If the petitioners fail to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;
(b) 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 identify proofs to ensure their identity;
(c) the petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., and 05.30 p.m., until further orders.
(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];
(e) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.
12-03-2026 MPA
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Coimbatore.
2.The Inspector of Police, CSCID, Coimbatore.
(Cr.No.56/2026) 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
MPA 12-03-2026