Shanmugam v. The State Rep. By

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN.

J.

The petitioners/Accused 2&3, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 294(b), 353, 506(i), 379, 430 of I.P.C r/w Section 21(5) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, in Crime No.358 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners have alleged to have transported 3 unit of red soil by using a lorry bearing registration No.TN 09 AB 2593, without having any valid license. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that they have nothing to do with the alleged offence and without prejudice to his contentions, the petitioners are prepared to deposit an amount of Rs.15,000/- each towards any charitable organization or association. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioners are alleged to have transported 3 unit of red soil by using a lorry, without having any valid license. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

6.On considering the voluntary submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each to the credit of "District Revenue Officer, Tiruvannamalai", without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court.

7. Merely, because the petitioners have 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, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also taking note of the fact that the petitioners have come forward to deposit an amount of Rs.15,000/- to the credit of "District Revenue Officer, Tiuvannamalai", this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

9. Accordingly, the petitioners shall make a non refundable deposit of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each as a nonrefundable deposit to the credit of the District Revenue Officer, Tiruvannamalai, within a period of two weeks from the date the order copy is made ready, without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court, on such deposit and production of proof, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar, Tiruvannamalai District, on condition that the petitioners shall 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 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 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 petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.15,000/- as a non-refundable deposit by way of Demand Draft to the credit of District Revenue Officer, concerned District within a period of twelve weeks from the date the order copy is made ready and the receipt of the same shall be produced before the concerned learned Magistrate at the time of execution of bond. It is made clear that merely, because the petitioners 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. [c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30.a.m., until further orders.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229A IPC. 06.10.2023 nvi

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN J.

nvi 06.10.2023