← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/13516/2025dismissed

Velumani v. The State Rep. By Its The Inspector Of Police,

2025-06-23Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 23.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Velumani ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police Arani Taluk Police Station Tiruvannamalai District Crime No. 186 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in Crime No.186 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.E.Sathiyaraj Elangovan For Respondent :

Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Section 303(2), 326(a) of BNS Act (corresponding Section 379, 430 of IPC) r/w Section 21(1) Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act 1957, in Crime No.186 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had illegally transported 1 unit of river sand in a vehicle without any valid license. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution. However, on instructions, the learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are 14 previous cases pending against the petitioner. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 2/4

6. Considering the facts and circumstances and that the petitioner is involved in 14 previous cases which are of similar nature, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 23.06.2025 uma To 1.The Inspector of Police Arani Taluk Police Station Tiruvannamalai District 2.. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

uma 3/4

23.06.2025 4/4