Subbukutti v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.25972 of 2025 Subbukutti ... Petitioner Vs.
State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Avinashipalayam Police Station, Tiruppur District.
... Respondent (Crime No.450 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.450 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioner : Mr.Ponbalaji For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 281, 303(2) of BNS Act and under Section 4(1)(1A), 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and under Section 185 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1/4
1988 in Crime No.450 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information, the respondent police went to the scene of occurrence and found that when the petitioner had illegally quarried 11⁄2 unit of savudu sand and transported the same in Bharat Benz Lorry. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner/A2, who is owner of the lorry and the said lorry along with gravel sand has already been arrested. He further submitted that there are two previous cases as against the petitioner. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, submissions made by learned counsels on either side, the petitioner had illegally quarried and transported gravel sand, the petitioner is 2/4
having two previous cases and the bad antecedents and hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 22.09.2025 Vv To
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Palladam.
Tiruppur District.
2. The Inspector of Police, Avinashipalayam Police Station, Tiruppur District.
3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.
K.RAJASEKAR , J.
Vv 3/4
Crl.O.P.No.25972 of 2025 22.09.2025 4/4
5/4