Karpagapragash v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27/03/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. Karpagapragash,

2. Karthik Raja @ Pampu Karthik,

3. Gopinath, ... Petitioners/Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Cscid Police Station, Tenkasi District.

Crime No.31/2026..

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.M..Prabu, For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS 1/6

PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.31/2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 6(4), TNC (RDCS) Act, 1982 and Section 7(1)(a)(ii) EC Act, in Crime No.31 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 19.02.2026, when the defacto complainant went for surveillance, they found that the petitioners were in illegal possession of 80 bags of PDS rice. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent person and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that based on the confession statement of the co-accused, the petitioner has been arrayed as A1 and Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that based on the confession of co-accused, the petitioners have been arrayed as accused in this case and also submitted that one previous case is pending against the petitioner. Hence, 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 petitioners and also considering the facts that based on the confession statement of the co-accused, the petitioners has been arrayed as accused in this case and the co-accused was released on bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tirunelveli, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are 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 3/6

Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tirunelveli, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners 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 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]. 4/6

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

(P D B J) 27.03.2026 TTA TO 1.The Inspector of Police, Cscid Police Station, Tenkasi District.

2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL,J TTA

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6170 of 2026 Date : 27/03/2026 6/6