R.Thangaraj v. The State Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR

1. R.Thangaraj

2. K.Krishnan Kumar Petitioner(s) Vs The state represented by the Inspector of Police, Sankari Police Station, Salem District (Crime No.69 of 2026).

Respondent(s) PRAYER:This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in event of his arrest in Crime No.69 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of Respondent Police. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.S.Ragu For Respondent(s):

Ms.J.R.Archana, GA (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) of BNSS 2023 and Sections 21(1) and 21(4) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 in connection with the Cr. No.69 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on the date of alleged occurrence, petitioners illegally transported about 3 units of ordinary stones in a tipper lorry bearing Reg.No.TN 28 AY 4228 without any valid license. Hence the case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated by the respondent police and they are no way connected with the offences as alleged by the prosecution and hence he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing of the respondent reiterated the prosecution's case and on instruction submitted that the rough stones and the vehicle used by the petitioners were seized by the respondent police and that the petitioners have no previous cases pending against Them. However, she objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

6. Considering the submissions made by both side counsel, nature of offence, and the alleged rough stone and vehicle have been seized by the

respondent police and that no previous cases are pending against petitioners, and also considering all other factors, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Sankari, on condition that each of the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am., for a period three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[b] the petitioners shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[d] 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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

19.02.2026 jai To 1.The Inspector of Police, Sankari Police Station, Salem District.

2. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Sankari.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

jai CRL OP No. 4110 of 19.02.2026