BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Thirty First day of October Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.NAGAMUTHU CRL OP(MD) No.14160 of 2011 1 SATHEESHKUMAR 2 PALA MANIVANNAN ... PETITIONERS / ACCUSED (RANK NOT KNOWN) Vs THE STATE REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE CSCID POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR. CR.NO. 494 OF 2011 ... RESPONDENT For Petitioner : M/S. R.MURUGAPPAN Advocate For Respondent : MR.K.S.DURAIPANDIAN, Addl. Public Prosecutor (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioners, who are accused in Crime No.494 of 2011 on the file of the respondent police for alleged offences under Sections 6(4) of TNSC (RDCS) Order 1982 r/w 7(i)a(ii) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, have come forward with the present petition seeking for anticipatory bail. 2. According to the case of prosecution, the lorry owned by the second petitioner was found carrying 95 Kilograms of rice, which is meant for the poor people under the Public Distribution System. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the names of the petitioners do not find a place in the First Information Report, and therefore, they are entitled for Anticipatory Bail. 4. In my considered opinion, insofar as the second petitioner is concerned, unless it is stated that he had knowledge that the driver of the lorry carried the rice with his consent, he cannot be blamed. 5. In such view of the matter, I am inclined to grant Anticipatory bail to the second petitioner. But, insofar as the first petitioner is concerned, he is stated to be the owner of PDS rice which was carried in his lorry. He has stealthy taken the rice meant for poor people under the Public Distribution System. Therefore, in my considered view, he is not entitled for anticipatory bail. 6. In the result, this petition is dismissed in respect of the first petitioner. Insofar as the second petitioner is concerned, he is granted Anticipatory bail, but with conditions. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7. Accordingly, the second petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, in the event of arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate I, Virudhunagar, executing a separate 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that the petitioners shall report before the respondent police every day at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks. The petitioner shall comply with the condition stipulated under Section 438 Cr.P.C., scrupulously. sd/- 31/10/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, VIRUDHUNAGAR. 2. THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE VIRUDHUNAGAR AT SRIVILLIPUTHUR. 3. INSPECTOR OF POLICE CSCID POLICE STATION, VIRUDHUNAGAR. 4. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1. CC to M/S. R.MURUGAPPAN Advocate SR. No.37171 ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.14160 of 2011 Date :31/10/2011 RJ/2.11.11 2p/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/