Saravanan v. Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.06.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Saravanan ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep by The Inspector of Police Arani Taluk Police Station, Arani, Tiruvannamalai.

Crime No.442 of 2023 ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.442 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Jawahar For Respondent : Mr. C.E.Pratap Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.06.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 336, 447 of IPC, 3(1) of TNPPDL Act and 21(1) of MM Act r/w 9(B)(i)(b) of Indian 1/6

Explosives Act, in Crime No.442 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused have illegally blasted the rocks and committed theft of the rocks from the land in Suvey No.47/1B, 47/1D, 47/2A. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he is the owner of the land and in order to procure the land, he had used the explosives through a contractor and other than that he has not committed any offence. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from 13.06.2023, hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner along with other accused, without getting any prior permission from the Government, blasted the rocks in the Government Poromboke land and committed theft of the rocks. He would further submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner. 2/6

5.At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without prejudice to his defence, the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit a substantial amount to any welfare scheme run by the Government as may be directed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.

7. On considering the voluntary submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) to the credit of "Manonmani Trust" without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court.

8. Merely, because the petitioner deposits the said amount, it would not amount to admission of his guilt. Therefore, it is open to the trial Court to deal with the case independently.

9. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and the period of 3/6

incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant of bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

10. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to make a non refundable deposit of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) to the credit of "Manonmani Trust, Account Number : 9945983362, IFSC Code : KKBK0000469, Kotak Mahindra Bank, Anna Nagar Branch", without prejudice to his rights and contentions and on such deposit and production of proof before the trial Court, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Arni, and on further conditions that: [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; 4/6

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560]; [f] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

28.06.2023 vkr To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Arni.

2. The Inspector of Police Arani Taluk Police Station, Arani, Tiruvannamalai.

3. The Central Prison, Vellore.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J., vkr 28.06.2023 6/6