Rajesh v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police/Sho

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR 1.Rajesh 2.Radhakrishnan 3.Velankumar 4.Nakkeeran 5.Selvam 6.Ravichandran 7.Arul 8.Karthikeyan ... Petitioners Vs.

State represented by The Inspector of Police/SHO, Annamalai Nagar Police Station, Cuddalore District.

... Respondent (Crime No.211 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest pending investigation in Crime No.211 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : M/s.Sivaram Tanjore Ramanathan For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

1/5

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence under Section 326(a), 303(2) of BNS Act, 2023 r/w Secc.21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 in Crime No.211 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that A1 in this case is running a Bricklin and other connected activities, for the purpose of illegally quarrying 3 units of sand from the Kollidam river using a JCB and two tractors to supply the sand to A1, a case has been registered and, A1 was arrested and, the petitioners have absconded.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that already arrested accused A1 released on bail and only based on the confession given by A1 this petitioners have been added as an accused. He further submitted that this petitioners having no previous cases against them and they were not aware about the illegal quarrying. He also stated that the properties were recovered from them. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and upon instructions 2/5

submitted that the JCB and two tractors were recovered and that the investigation in this case is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case; and taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side); and also the fact that though at the time of recovering 3 units of sand, JCB and two tractors were recovered. But the fact remains that the petitioners joined hands with other accused involved in transportation of huge machineries and huge quantity of river sand and thereby they are not only illegally quarrying the river sand but also damaged the ecology and water body more particularly river bed. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 11.12.2025 ssi To 1.The Inspector of Police/SHO, Annamalai Nagar Police Station, Cuddalore District.

3/5

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

ssi 4/5

11.12.2025 5/5