Amalpapilonraj v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Ambathurai

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. 7036 of 2026 1.Amalpapilonraj 2.Karan ... Petitioners Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Ambathurai Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.60 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For petitioners : Mr.S.Sivaprakash 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. 60 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) of BNS and Sections 21(1) & 1/5

21(4) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, in Crime No. 60 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that 25.03.2026, the defacto complainant, who is the Village Administrative Officer, found that the petitioners along with other accused persons was in illegal possession of sand. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and they are falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected with the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the offences are grave in nature. The petitioners are involved in theft of valuable minerals. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. However, the petitioners have no previous case.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 2/5

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 petitioners have no previous case 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 petitioners are ordered to be released on anticipatory bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Dindigul, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, at 10.30 a.m., on every Saturday, for a period of four weeks, thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

3/5

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners 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]. [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 No.III, Dindigul.

2.The Inspector of Police, Ambathurai Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.60 of 2026) 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 7036 of 2026 Date : 09.04.2026 5/5