Robin Singh v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Eraniel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 09.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 6981 of 2026 Robin Singh ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Eraniel Police Station, Kanniyakumari District.

(Crime No.167 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.L.George Paul Anto.

Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 167 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 223, 289 and 303(2) of BNS and Sections 4(1)(1A), 21(1) and 25(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and 1/6

Regulation) Act and Sections 3, 4 (b), 5 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908 in Crime No.167 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.03.2026 at about 01.00 p.m., on secret information, the defacto complainant went to the scene of occurrence, where the accused along with other accused involved in illegal quarrying at prohibited site belonging to the first accused. The authorities claim to have seized several items from that place, including two Hitachi and explosive substances. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent 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. The petitioner is only the supplier of explosives. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that the offences are grave in nature. The petitioner is involved in theft of valuable minerals from Government land and the petitioner supplied the explosives 2/6

substances for the quarrying purpose to the main accused. The petitioner has no previous case. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to 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 against the petitioner, considering the minerals involved in this case, the petitioner has no previous case, he is the only supplier of the explosives to the main accused and also considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, 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, Eraniel, Kanniyakumari District, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar 3/6

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 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

(P D B J) 09.04.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, Kanniyakumari District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Eraniel Police Station, Kanniyakumari District.

(Crime No.167 of 2026) 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, 4/6

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6981 of 2026 Date : 09.04.2026 6/6