Manimaran v. State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Manimaran S/o.Thirugnanasambandham, No.1/79, Bharadhi Street, Kaliyanasozhapuram, Namasivayapuram, Mayiladuthurai District.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep.by, Inspector of Police, Manalmedu Police Station, Mayiladuthurai district.

Cr.No.83/2026.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.21 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s):

C.T.Saravanan For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Act, 2023 r/w. 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation ) Act, 1957 in Crime No.83 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was involved in the illegal transportation of 1/2 unit of river sand in a TATA ACE vehicle without any valid permit or licence. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and 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 the petitioner 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 submitted that the petitioner has four previous cases pending against him, out of which two are of a similar nature. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. From the submission of the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has 4 previous cases, out of which two are of a similar nature, which clearly demonstrates that the petitioner has misused the

liberty granted by this Court and subverts the course of justice by again committing the similar offences. Further the present case involves the illegal exploitation of natural resources, which has to be viewed seriously. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 23-03-2026 MPA To 1.The Inspector of Police, Manalmedu Police Station, Mayiladuthurai district.

Cr.No.83/2026.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MPA 23-03-2026