Sellamuthu @ Chellamuthu v. State by the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioner/A17, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 49, 126(2), 296(b), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and section 3 of TN PPDL Act, 1992 in Crime Page2 of 6 No.26 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with his associates, waylaid a car and demanded an increase in poultry rearing charges, obstructed the transportation of chicks from the hatchery to the poultry farm, damaged vehicles, and threatened that no chicks should be transported without their permission. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioner.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is instigated the members of the association to block vehicles carrying chickens either from farms or from hatcheries to poultry farms. He further submitted that the petitioner was not at all present at the scene of occurrence. He further submitted that the protest was only to demand an increase in the price of chicks from Rs.6.50 per kg to Rs.22.71 per kg payable to farmers and that no violence was caused to the vehicle or to any person. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that totally 21 accused in this case; the petitioner is ranked as A17; several cases have been registered across States in respect of similar occurrences and that in the present case, the petitioner, along with other accused, resorted to stopping the movement of the vehicle, thereby causing loss to the hatchery. He further submitted that the Page3 of 6 investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6On perusal of the FIR and other connected materials, it is revealed that the vehicle was being transported and that the persons who intercepted the car only demanded that the driver to take back the vehicle and did not resort to any violence against the driver and insisted on an increase in poultry rearing charges.

¶7Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly that no one was injured in this case and that the case pertains only to a road roko, which resulted in some revenue loss on account of the death of certain chicks, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶8Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Udumalpet, Tiruppur District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further condition:

(a) If the petitioners fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of Page4 of 6 receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks.

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions 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 v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS. 23-02-2026 MPA Page5 of 6 To

1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Udumalpet, Tiruppur District.

¶2State by The Inspector of Police Udumalpet Police Station, Tiruppur District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o4346oofo2026 K.RAJASEKAR,oJ. MPA CRLoOPoNo.o4346oofo2026 23-02-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Sellamuthu @ Chellamuthu S/o. Kanthasamy, No.4/90, Vellamarathupatti Post, Chinnapappanuthu, Tiruppur District ..Petitioner(s) Vs State by The Inspector of Police Udumalpet Police Station, Tiruppur District (Crime No NOT KNOWN of 2026) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner on Anticipatory Bail in the event of his arrest or remand in Crime No. NOT KNOWN of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Udumalpet Police Station, Tiruppur District, on such terms and conditions as this Honble Court. For Petitioner(s): A.M Natraj For Respondent(s): M/S.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)