Sivasurya v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 06/04/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Sivasurya, ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep By the Inspector of Police,, Civil Suppliees C.I.D., Dindigul.

(Crime No.81 of 2026). ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Lenin Kumar, For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.81 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police.

1/6

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 6(4) of Tamil Nadu Scheduled Commodities (RDCS) Order, 1982 and r/w 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 in Crime No.81 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 26.03.2026, when the defacto complainant went for surveillance, they found that the petitioner was in illegal possession of 665 kgs of PDS rice. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that the property was recovered and the petitioner has no previous case. 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 considering the facts that the petitioner has no previous case and the property was recovered and so far, no statment has been received against the petitioner from the card holders, 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 Judicial Magistrate-III, Dindigul, and on further conditions that: 3/6

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for the 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 petitioner 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].

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

(P D B J) 06.04.2026 TTA 4/6

TO 1.The Judicial Magistrate-III, Dindigul.

2.The Inspector of Police,, Civil Suppliees C.I.D., Dindigul.

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL,J TTA

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.6480 of 2026 Date : 06/04/2026 6/6