Jagan v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14-05-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Jagan S/o.Nadarajan, No. 2-301, Pappureddikkuthagai, Ayakkaranpulam 2 Sethi, Vedaranyam Taluk, Nagapattinam District.
..Petitioner(s) Vs State represented by:
The Inspector of Police Voimedu Police Station, Vedaranyam Taluk, Nagapattinam District.
(Crime No. 96/2026) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: The Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No. 96/2026 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. Subramanian Vaidyanathan For Respondent(s):
Mr. A. Damodaran, Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The petitioner/Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) of
B.N.S. read with Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulations) Act in Cr. No.96 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. Today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner represented that the petitioner was arrested by the respondent police and remanded to judicial custody on 12.05.2026 and when he approached the Sessions Court, the learned Sessions Judge stated as per the direction of the High Court, filing of the petitions will be taken on every Monday and thereby advised him to file application on Monday through online. He would further submit that since the marriage engagement of the petitioner has been fixed on 18.05.2026, there is an urgency to file petition and thereby, he prayed to permit him to file bail petition before this Court. This Court ascertained the urgency as alleged by the learned counsel for the petitioner through the respondent police and thereby permitted the petitioner to file petition for bail today itself. Accordingly, the bail petition has been numbered and taken on file and posted for hearing after furnishing copies to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had illegally transported sand in two unregistered lorries, without any license. Hence the case.
4. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner has been under judicial custody since 12.05.2026 and he does not have any bad antecedent and his marriage engagement was fixed on 18.05.2026 and hence prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.
5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police has reiterated the prosecution case and objected for grant of bail to the petitioner. However, the learned Government Advocate has fairly submitted that sand and vehicle were seized by the respondent police.
6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
7. Considering the rival submissions on either side, the nature of offences, the fact that no previous case is pending against this petitioner and taking into consideration of the marriage engagement fixed for the petitioner on 18.05.2026 and also considering the incarceration period of this petitioner from 11.05.2026, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Vedaranyam and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 4 weeks and thereafter, to appear before the respondent police as and when required for interrogation. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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 petitioner 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].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
14-05-2026 MJS Note:
1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.
2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.
To
1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Vedaranyam.
2. The Inspector of Police, Voimedu Police Station, Vedaranyam Taluk, Nagapattinam District.
3. The Jail Superintendent, Nagapattinam Prison.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
P.DHANABAL, J.
MJS 14-05-2026