Sadiq Ali v. The State of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 25.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 12019 of 2026 Sadiq Ali ... Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Through the Intelligence Officer, Trichy / Chennai Zonal Unit. (F.No.DRI/CZU/TRY/VIII/48/ENQ-01/INT-01/2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Prabu

Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.S.Gurumoorthy Special Public Prosecutor (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in F.No.DRI/CZU/TRY/VIII/48/ENQ-01/INT-01/2026 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 Sections 135, 135A r/w. 104 of the Customs Act, in F.No.DRI/CZU/TRY/VIII/48/ENQ-01/INT-01/2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 23.02.2026, simultaneous searches were conducted by the respondent officials across multiple godowns and residential premises in Tamil Nadu. It is alleged that the officers recovered

4.653 MT of export-prohibited Red Sanders logs valued well above Rs.1 Crore. The respondent further projects that a well organized smuggling syndicate is operating and alleges that the petitioner acts as a Principal co-conspirator coordinating procurement, storage logistics and hawala settlements.

¶3The 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. On the date of occurrence he was not present at the scene of occurrence. Only based on the confession statement of the co-accused this petitioner was implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the offences are grave in nature. The contraband was recovered from other accused persons. On their confession statement this petitioner was implicated in this case. Investigation is still pending. He vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

¶6Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, the entire contraband was recovered from other accused, even according to the prosecution, he is only about to procure the above said contraband and already co-accused were arrested and released on bail, no previous case is pending against the petitioner, though the FIR has been registered in the month of February 2026, for the past four months no action has been taken by the respondent to secure the accused and by this time the material part of the investigation might to have been completed and considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, 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 bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Trichy, on condition that the petitioner shall 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [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 589 B.N.S.

(P D B J)

25.06.2026 TM To

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Trichy.

2.The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Through the Intelligence Officer, Trichy / Chennai Zonal Unit.

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

P. DHANABAL, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12019 of 2026 Date : 25.06.2026