Thavamani v. The State By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

The petitioners apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) and 326(a) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.209 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that, based on a complaint given by the defacto complainant, the respondent police went to the spot and found that the petitioners were involved in illegal sand mining in the patta land of the defacto complainant with JCB and Tractor. Hence, the case. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they have no previous case and without prejudice to their contentions, the petitioners are prepared to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- each towards any charitable organization or association. Therefore, he prays for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 1/6

4.

Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the petitioners had involved in illegal sand mining form the patta land, owned by the defacto complainant using their JCB and Tractor. He would further submit that there is no previous case as against the petitioners. 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 respect of grant or refusal of anticipatory bail to the persons indulging in illegal sand mining, smuggling and theft of sand and minerals, the Apex Court in S.Mohamed Shahul Hameed Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.6029 of 2020 dated 11.12.2020), while expressing disagreement with the sweep observation made by this Court on the aspect of continuous misuse of discretionary power by the offenders and the enforcers as well in an organised manner, has clarified that in consideration of anticipatory bail, the role assigned to a person would have to be considered. 2/6

7.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and that there is no previous case pending against the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. However, in order to curb illegal sand mining activities and taking into consideration the voluntary submission made by the petitioners offering to deposit a considerable amount to any charitable organization or association, this Court is of the opinion that as one of the conditions for grant of anticipatory bail, the petitioners may be directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) each to the credit of District Legal Services Authority, Ranipet District, without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the trial Court. 8.

It is made clear that merely because the petitioners are depositing the amount, it would not amount to the petitioners admitting their guilt in the criminal case and such amount is being paid without prejudice to the right of the petitioners.

9.

Accordingly, the petitioners shall make a non refundable deposit of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) each by way of Demand Draft/RTGS/NEFT to the credit of the District Legal Services Authority, Ranipet District, and on such deposit and on receipt of proof of payment, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their 3/6

appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Arcot on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties 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 conditions that:

[a] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[b] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

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

[d] 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]; [e] If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be 4/6

registered under Section 269 of BNS.

19.11.2024 stn 5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

stn 19.11.2024 6/6