Manjunathan v. State Represented By, The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 09.01.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
1. Manjunathan
2. Vijayalakshmi ... Petitioners Vs The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Thoppur Police Station, Dharmapuri District.
Crime No.326 of 2024.
... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent Police in Crime No.326 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.J.Pradeep For Respondent : Mr.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.326 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 303 (2) of BNS read with 21(1) of
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act 1957, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail.
2. Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioners, false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks indulgence of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and that a case of large granite theft have been fabricated against them. He also submits that the petitioners have no previous case against them and without prejudice to the defence and contention, they are ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- each (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) as nonrefundable deposit to any welfare scheme of the Government or any organization. He further submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court.
3. The case of the prosecution as put forth by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that six large multicoloured granite stones have been transported. He would further submit that the petitioners have no previous case pending against him.
4. Considering the voluntary submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the District Legal Services Authority, Dharmapuri, without prejudice to the right of defence before the Trial Court and making it clear that it would not amount to admission of guilt.
5. In respect of grant or refusal of anticipatory bail to the persons indulging in illegal sand mining, smuggling and theft of sand and minerals, the Apex Court in S.Mohamed Shahul Hameed Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.6029 of 2020 dated 11.12.2020), while expressing disagreement with the sweep observation made by this Court on the aspect of continuous misuse of discretionary power by the offenders and the enforcers as well in an organised manner, has clarified that in consideration of anticipatory bail, the role assigned to a person would have to be considered.
6. Further, having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions and accordingly, they are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance within a period of
fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Dharmapuri, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a separate bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), each 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 said Magistrate, on further condition that:
[a] if the petitioners fails to surrender before the said Magistrate within a period of fifteen days, this Order shall stand automatically cancelled;
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks, thereafter every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;
[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 petitioners 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];
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered
under Section 269 of BNS.
09.01.2025 dpq A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J, dpq To 1.The Inspector of Police, Thoppur Police Station, Dharmapuri District.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
09.01.2025