Nagarajan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Cscid

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 07.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 6733 of 2026 Nagarajan ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, CSCID Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.81 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.S.S.Shahul Hameed Baig 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. 81 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

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 (Regulation of Distribution by Card System) Order, 1982 and r/w. 1/5

Section 7(1)(a)(ii), 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 the defacto complainant went on surveillance. At that time, he intercepted the accused along with co-accused and found him in illegal possession of 19 bags of PDS rice, each weighing about 665 kilograms. 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. Only on the basis of the confession of the co-accused, this accused was implicated. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) fairly submits that the offence is grave in nature. The petitioner is in illegal possession of 19 bags of PDS rice. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, the petitioner has no previous case. Investigation is still pending.

2/5

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 the quantity involved and the petitioner has no previous case and also considering the other facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, 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.III, Dindigul and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, at 10.30 a.m., on every Saturday for a period of four weeks, thereafter, as and when required for interrogation: [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

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

3/5

[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) 07.04.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.III, Dindigul.

2.The Inspector of Police, CSCID Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.81 of 2026) 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6733 of 2026 Date : 07.04.2026 5/5