Manikandan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Cscid - Madurai
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 26.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Manikandan
...Petitioner/
Sole Accused Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Civil supplies and Crime Investigation Department, (CSCID-Madurai), Dindigul Police Station, Dindigul District.
(Crime No.4 of 2026)
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioner :Mr.S.Kishore Kumar Advocate.
For Respondent :Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.4 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
1/7
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Sole Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 6(4) of the Tamil Nadu Schedules Commodities (Regulation of Distribution by Card System) order, 1982 and Section 7(i)(a)(ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, in Crime No.4 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 04.01.2026, at about 09.00 a.m., based on the secret information, the defacto complainant along with police officials were conducting regular check up and found that the petitioner had illegally transported PDS rice in gunny bags. Hence, the case.
2/7
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that investigation is pending and the petitioner has no previous cases. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner and quantity of the 3/7
materials involved in this case and also considering the fact that the petitioner has no previous cases and materials were already seized, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to 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 Judicial Magistrate No.3, Dindigul, Dindigul District, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police once in a week ie., on Every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for 4/7
interrogation [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
[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 Judicial 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 petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 5/7
P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
(P D B J) 26.03.2026 vsg To 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.3, Dindigul, Dindigul District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Civil supplies and Crime Investigation Department, (CSCID-Madurai), Dindigul Police Station, Dindigul District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
P. DHANABAL, J., vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6004 of 2026 Date : 26.03.2026 7/7