Murugan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thenkarai
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 07.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Murugan
...Petitioners/Accused No.1
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thenkarai Police Station Theni District.
(Crime No.214 of 2026)
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioner :Mr.M.Prabu Advocate.
For Respondent :Mr.P.Kottai Chamy Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 214 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. 1/7
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 303(2) of BNS and Seciton 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, in Crime No.214 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 19.02.2026, the respondent Police found that the petitioner/A1, who is the driver of the vehicle Tipper Lorry bearing Registration No.TN 41 AX 0410 illegally transported three units of red sand. Hence, the present case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the driver of the vehicle. He would further submit that the 2/7
petitioner is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that the investigation is still pending and the offences are grave in nature. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, he fairly submits that no previous case is pending against the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged 3/7
against the petitioners, and considering the quantity of the material involved in this case and the material part of the investigation might have been completed and no previous case is pending against the petitioner, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Periyakulam, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police once in a week ie., on Every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for 4/7
interrogation.
[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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 petitioners 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].
5/7
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
(P D B J) 07.04.2026 vsg To 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate, Periyakulam. 2.The Inspector of Police, Thenkarai Police Station Theni District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
P. DHANABAL, J vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6600 of 2026 Date : 07.04.2026 7/7