Pushparaj v. The State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 04.09.2020

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.13758 of 2020 1.Pushparaj 2.Tamilarasan @ Tamilselvan ... Petitioners Vs.

State represented by The Inspector Of Police, Cheyyar Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.

(Cr.No.86 of 2020) ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.86 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : M/s.B.Sudha For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz.

Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 379, 430 of IPC, r/w. Section 21(5) of Mines and Minerals Act and r/w 3 of Public Property Damages Act, in Crime No.86 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant is that the petitioners had transported 1 unit of river sand through lorry without obtaining proper license. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent person and they have been falsely implicated in this case. On instruction, he would further submit that taking into consideration the present Covid pandemic situation the petitioners are prepared to donate/pay some considerable amount to any charitable organization or association without prejudice to his defence and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners without permission from the Government, had dug the land and taken sand and thereby degraded the environment and caused damages to the ecology. Hence, he vehemently opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. This court is of the opinion that the offenders despite several orders passed by various benches of this court regarding illegal sand mining and knowing fully well about the evil consequences affecting the environment and society at large and the implications thereon are indulging in the offences of illegal quarrying/mining, theft and smuggling of sand and minerals. These cases come within the category of cases of large magnitude affecting and impacting livelihood of a very large number of people knowingly and unknowingly.

6. This Court finds that the discretionary power has been consciously and continuously misused by the offenders in an organised manner and this Court is of the firm opinion that the discretionary powers cannot be extended to persons indulging in illegal sand mining, smuggling and theft of sand and minerals.

7. In view of the order passed by this Court in Crl. OP No.13334 of 2020 etc. Batch, dated 03.09.2020, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

-sd/- 04/09/2020 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 JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, CHEYYAR.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHEYYAR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

CC to M/S. B.SUDHA Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.13758/2020 Date :04/09/2020 cs 18/09/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/