Kumar v. State Rep By
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
The petitioner who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 21(4) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act 1957 and Section 379 of IPC in Crime No.390 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is alleged to have transported 3 units of gravel sand without valid license in a tipper lorry. Hence the complaint.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner had transported 3 units of
gravel sand without valid license in a tipper lorry. He further submitted that there is no previous case pending as against the petitioner. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.
6. In view of the rehabilitation undertaken under the Tamil Nadu District Mineral Foundation Rules, 2017, and in order to curb the illegal sand mining activities, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) as non refundable deposit to the credit of the concerned District Mineral Foundation Trust, without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court.
7. Merely, because the petitioner had deposited 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.
8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
9. Accordingly, the petitioner shall make a non refundable deposit of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) by way of Demand Draft/RTGS/NEFT to the credit of the District Mineral Foundation Trust concerned, without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court, on such deposit and production of proof, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.2, Palacode, Dharmapuri District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to
the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:
[a] the petitioner and 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 tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[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 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].
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC.
31.10.2022 mpl
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
mpl 31.10.2022