Jayavel v. State By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25..06..2021 CORAM:- THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN Crl.O.P.No.9261 of 2021 Jayavel ... Petitioner -VersusThe State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Dusi Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

[Crime No.2295 of 2020] ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code praying to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.2295 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :

Mr.A.Saranraj For Respondent :

Mr.C.E.Pratap, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police in connection with a case registered in Crime No.2295 of 2020 for the alleged offence under Sections 294(b), 353, 307, 379 and 430 of IPC r/w 21(5) of The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Section 3(2) of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle. On the date of occurrence, the petitioner along with the other accused transported river sand illegally. When the de facto complainant, attempted to intercept the lorry, the petitioner and the other accused attempted to run over the lorry and also attempted to kill the de facto complainant. The petitioner and the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

other accused had also caused damage to the river bund and indulged in illicit quarrying of mines.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent of the offence alleged and he has been falsely implicated in the case. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this court.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the petition.

5. This is second petition for bail. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, this court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case for the grant of anticipatory bail as there is every possibility of repeating the offence by the petitioner, if he is released on bail. Thus, the Criminal Original Petition deserves only to be dismissed and the same is dismissed accordingly. -sd/- 25/06/2021 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, TIRUVANNAMALAI.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DUSI POLICE STATION, TIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.A.SARANRAJ Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.9261/2021 Date :25/06/2021 cs 17/07/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/