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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Dinesh Kumar ... Petitioners Vs.

State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Sathuvacheri Police Station Vellore District (Crime No 89 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.89 of 2025 pending on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Deepak Kumar For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) and 326 of BNS, Act in Crime No. 89 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

Page No.1 of 4

2. The case of the prosecution is that when the defacto complainant/ Assistant Geologist is on routine patrol duty with regard to illegal transportation, it was found that the petitioner along with other accused were allegedly involved in transporting river sand. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed on him. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner along with other accused illegally transported river sand in a vehicle bearing registration No.TN 70 A 3693 without any valid license. He also submits that five previous cases were pending against the petitioner out of which, three cases were similar in nature and two cases were registered under Prohibition Act.

Page No.2 of 4

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

6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) and also considering the fact that five previous cases were pending against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 14.07.2025 NR To

1. The Judicial Magistrate-V, Vellore

2. The Inspector of Police, Sathuvacheri Police Station Vellore District

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Page No.3 of 4

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN , J.

NR 14.07.2025 Page No.4 of 4