Jayaraman v. The State Sho Rep.By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.09.2020

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Crl.O.P.No.15054 of 2020 Jayaraman ... Petitioner Vs.

The State SHO Rep.by the Inspector Of Police, Virudhachalam Police Station, Virudhachalam, Cuddalore District (Cr.No.412 of 2020) ... Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner enlarge him in the event of arrest in Cr.No.412 of 2020 dated 11.04.2020 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Kathiresan For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz.

Additional Public Prosecutor

O R D E R

(The case has been heard through video conference) The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 379, 430, 379 of IPC, r/w. Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals Act, in Crime No.412 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

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

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner without obtaining any permission from the Government, had illegally dugged the land and transported sand, thereby degraded the environment and caused damages to the ecology. Hence, he vehemently opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

5. This Court is of the opinion that the offenders, despite several orders being 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. Hence, in view of the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.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/- 24/09/2020 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, NO.I, VIRUDHACHALAM.

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIRUDHACHALAM POLICE STATION, VIRUDHACHALAM, CUDDALORE DISTRICT.

CC to M/S.G.KADHIRESAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges CRL OP.15054/2020 Date :24/09/2020 cs 30/09/2020 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/