Govindan v. State Rep By

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.239 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) of BNS and Section 21(1) of MMDR Act, the present petition has been filed seeking anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on 29.11.2024, the respondent police during their regular patrol duty at Vedalawadi Village at that time one lorry bearing Registration No.TN 20 BA 1050 was transporting White Block Stone without any bills or receipt and thereafter respondent police conduct enquiry and registered. Hence, the case.

3.Pleading innocence on the part of the petitioner, false implication in the case, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks indulgence of this court. He would further submit that he is the owner cum driver of the lorry and he is no way connected with the alleged offence and he is ready to furnish substantial sureties for their due release to ensure their regular attendance. He is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

4.The case of the prosecution as putforth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of anticipatory bail, is that based on the complaint of one M.Assam, who is the Assistant A/D of the Mines and Minerals Department, Ranipet District, the respondent police during their regular patrol duty at Vedalawadi Village, one lorry bearing Registration No.TN 20 BA 1050 was transporting White Block Stone and without any bills or receipt. He would further submit that there is no previous case as against the petitioner. 5.Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police 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. 7.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the White Block Stone involved is small quantity and that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, in order to curb illegal sand mining activities and taking into consideration the voluntary submission made by the petitioner 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 petitioner may be directed to deposit a sum of Rs.

5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the credit of "The Chief Minister Relief Fund", without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court. 8.It is made clear that merely because the petitioner is depositing the amount, it would not amount to the petitioner admitting his guilt in the criminal case and such amount is being paid without prejudice to the right of the petitioner.

9.Accordingly, the petitioner shall make a non refundable deposit of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) by way of Demand Draft/RTGS/NEFT to the credit of "THE CHIEF MINISTER RELIEF

FUND", and on such deposit and on receipt of proof of payment, 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 at Sholinghur, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) 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 petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of his Aadhar Card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily 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 269 of BNS. 05.12.2024 ah

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

ah 05.12.2024