Murugesan v. The State Rep By Sub-Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Murugesan S/o. Raja D. No. 3/124, Sundekuppam, Krishnagiri 635 101 ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State rep by Sub-Inspector of Police, CSCID- Coimbatore, Dharmapuri Crime No. 6 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before any court in connection with the case in Crime No. 6 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.T.Balaji For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 6(4) of TN Scheduled Commodities (RDCS) Order, 1982 and 7(1)(a)(ii) of Essential Commodities

Act, 1955 in Crime No. 6 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was found in illegal transportation of 1100 kgs of banned tobacco products without valid permission. Hence, this case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was charged under smuggling of PDS rice and the same was not recovered from him. He further submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner had illegally transported 1100 kgs of PDS rice and that he has one previous case of a similar in nature against him. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence and the fact that the petitioner has 1 previous cases of a similar nature, which clearly demonstrates that the petitioner has misused the liberty granted by this Court and has come to

the adverse notice of the police by repeatedly committing similar offences, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 26-03-2026 DRL To 1.The Sub-Inspector of Police, CSCID- Coimbatore, Dharmapuri 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 26-03-2026