Murukaram v. State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Murukaram ... Petitioner/A2 Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Vedaranyam Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

... Respondent (Crime No.7 of 2026) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest pending investigation in Crime No.7 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.Palanivel Nadimuthu For Respondent :

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 303(2) of B.N.S. Act and 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 in Crime No.7 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was 1/4

illegally transported 1 unit of savudu sand without any valid licence or permit. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and he is ready to co-operate for investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that one previous cases has been registered against the petitioner. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent.

6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) the petitioner has got one previous case, which clearly demonstrate 2/4

that as and when he was enlarged on anticipatory bail, he misused the liberty. In view of the above it become inexorable to dismiss the present petition, as the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 09.03.2026 ssi To:

1.The Inspector of Police, Vedaranyam Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN , J.

ssi 3/4

09.03.2026 4/4