T .Rajesh v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 18-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. T .Rajesh Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State rep by The Inspector of Police C.S.C.l.D., Salem, Crime No. 317 of Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner / Accused No.3 on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No. 317 of 2025, pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s):

Subramanian Vaidyanathan For Respondent(s):

Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 6(4) of the Tamil Nadu Scheduled Commodities (Regulation of Distribution by Card System) Order,

1982 read with Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 in Crime No. 317 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was involved in the collection and transportation of 2,800 kilograms of rice meant for the Public Distribution System (PDS). The police intercepted the vehicle in which A1 was transporting the said rice and subsequently seized the same. Based on the statement recorded from A1, it was revealed that A2 had procured the rice from Omalur, Dharapuram and Kamalapuram areas and that it was being transported for deliver to A3, the petitioner herein. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been implicated solely on the basis of the confession of the coaccused, wherein it was alleged that he was the person intended to receive the transported rice. He further submitted that the petitioner is willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police reported that the petitioner is also having bad antecedents and it is alleged that the petitioner is the person who is supposed to collect the rice from the arrested accused.

5.Though it is stated that the petitioner is a one who is supposed to receive the rice and he is also the vehicle owner, whereas the investigation reveals that A1 and A2 are actively participated in the offence and they have collected the rice from various places around the Omalur Taluk and the accused have stated that they have intend to sell the same to the petitioner herein. However, the statement has not revealed that the petitioner has given a consent for purchasing the same from A1 and A2 and to involve in smuggling of the rice. In view of the same, though the petitioner is having previous antecedents and earlier petition also dismissed this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions: 6.

Accordingly, 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 is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Salem, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police

officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity. [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the Petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the Petitioners 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];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

18-12-2025 gbi Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.The State rep by The Inspector of Police C.S.C.l.D., Salem, Crime No. 317 of 2.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Salem.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

gbi CRL OP No. 33775 of 18-12-2025