V.Sathishkumar v. The State Represented By The Inspector Of Police Kandhili Police Station

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN V.Sathishkumar ..Petitioner Vs The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Kandhili Police Station Thirupathur District.

(Crime No.88 of 2026) ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of arrest in Crime No.88 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner:

Mr.K.Prabhu For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 305(e) and 326(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.88 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 05.03.2026, while the respondent police were conducting routine rounds within the jurisdiction of Kandhili Police Station, they noticed a JCB vehicle bearing Registration No. TN-83-MA-3304

allegedly involved in illegal sand transportation without valid permit. Hence, the case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged. It is submitted that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence and has been falsely implicated only on the ground that he is the owner of the vehicle. It is also submitted that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation and will not abscond or tamper with witnesses. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner has got two previous cases of similar nature relating to illegal sand transportation. It is further submitted that the conduct of the petitioner clearly shows that he is repeatedly involved in similar offences. 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. Considering the submission of the learned counsel on either side, though it is contended that the petitioner has been implicated only on the basis

of ownership of the vehicle, it is seen that the petitioner has criminal antecedents involving similar offences. Therefore, if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, he is likely to misuse the liberty. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 23-03-2026 NSL To 1.The Inspector of Police Kandhili Police Station, Thirupathur District.

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 23-03-2026