Kumarandi v. The Sub Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 23/03/2021 PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.NIRMAL KUMAR Kumarandi ... Petitioner/A16 Vs The State rep.by, The Sub Inspector of Police, Kallidaikurichi Police Station, Thirunelveli District Crime No.417/2020..
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.Joel Paul Antony, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.K.Suyambulinga Bharathi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 417 of 2020 on the file of the Respondent Police ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who is arrayed as A16, apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offence under Section 379 of IPC, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and others were said to have illegally transported 11,046 units of river sand. Hence, a complaint has been registered.
3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent.
1/3
4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is not having any bad antecedent. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner.
6.On perusal of the materials available on records, it is seen that the petitioner has been arrayed as A16. Initially FIR was registered only against A1 and during the investigation, other accused have been find out. In this case totally there are 23 persons have been arrayed as accused. It is submitted that the Deputy Thasildar, who along with team and revenue officials have inspected the occurrence place and it was found that huge river sand have been mined and transported. This Court earlier had held that these acts cannot be done without connivance of the accused, officials and persons in power.
As regards this petitioner, A2 had clearly stated that he had purchased all the sands whether M sand or river sand only through this petitioner and invoice and bills, which have been produced by him, which was obtained through this petitioner. Further the bills and invoice along with permission documents of Mines and Minerals Department found to be forged and 11,046 units of river sand have been seized. It is also seen that it is a clear case of sand theft and it is clearly proved. 7.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
8.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.
sd/- 23/03/2021 / TRUE COPY / / /2021 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
LS Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
2/3
TO 1 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KALLIDAIKURICHI POLICE STATION, THIRUNELVELI DISTRICT THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.4034 of 2021 Date :23/03/2021 NR/VR(30.03.2021) 3P:3C 3/3