Ragavan v. The State Rep.By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20-01-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP NO. 671 of 2025 1.Ragavan 2.Venkatesan Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep.By The Inspector Of Police Thyagadurgam Police Station, Kallakurichi District Crime No.455/2024 Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

Mr.P.Rajavel For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.455 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) of BNS, 2023 r/w. Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) 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 seek indulgence of this court. He

would submit that with permission only the petitioners transported the M-sand. He would submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. He also submits that the petitioners, without prejudice to the defence and contention, are ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- each as non-refundable deposit to any welfare scheme of the Government or any organization. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

3. The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that, on 28.12.2024, at about 03.20 p.m, when the Assistant Geologist, Geology and Mining Department, Kallakurichi along with the other officials during their regular vehicle checkup in Thyagadurgmam to Manoorpettai road, they found that the petitioners was illegally transporting 5 units of M-sand in a tipper lorry and a complaint was given before the respondent police and that the vehicle was also seized. He would further submit that the petitioners has no previous case.

4. 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.

5. Considering the voluntary submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) each as non refundable deposit to "The District Legal Services Authority, Kallakurichi" without prejudice to the right of defence before the Trial Court and making it clear that it would not amount to admission of guilt.

6. Further, having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal 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.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to make a non-refundable

deposit of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) each by way of Demand Draft/RTGS/NEFT to the credit of "The District Legal Services Authority, Kallakurichi", without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the trial Court, on such deposit and production of proof, the petitioners 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-II, Kallakurichi, Kallakurichi District, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a separate 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 respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the said Magistrate, on further condition that: [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily 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 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 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.

dsn 20.01.2025

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

dsn 20.01.2025