Loganathan v. The State Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 20.03.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Loganathan ... Petitioner Vs.

The State, Rep. by Sub-Inspector of Police Chengalpattu Taluk Police Station Chengalpattu District (Crime No.859 of 2024) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.859 of 2024, on the file of the respondent Police.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 303(2), 326(a) of BNS, r/w. Sections 21(1) of Mines and Minerals Act 1957 in Crime No.859 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that, the petitioner had illegally transported twelve units of graval sand in a lorry. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent; that he has been falsely implicated in this case and 1/4

prayed for anticipatory bail for the petitioner. 4.Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the petitioner has no bad antecedents.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.

6.Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submissions made by the learned counsels on either side, the fact that the contraband was seized, that the petitioner has no bad antecedents and since, custodial interrogation is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7.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 II, Chengalpattu 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 respondent police or the 2/4

police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a]the petitioner and 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 petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 am, until further orders.

[c]the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

[d]the petitioner 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 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].

[f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

20.03.2025 sai 3/4

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

sai To 1.The Judicial Magistrate II, Chengalpattu 2.The Sub-Inspector of Police Chengalpattu Taluk Police Station Chengalpattu District 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

20.03.2025 4/4