Ranjith Kumar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Vangal
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20/05/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
1. Ranjith Kumar
2. Siva
3. Ramesh
4. Govindaraj ... Petitioners/Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Vangal Police Station, Karur District.
(Crime No.52 of 2026). ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Ms.N.Ratchaka Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.A. Albert James, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 52 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police.
1/6
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, 2023 r/w. 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 in Crime No.52 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.02.2026, upon receiving secret information, the respondent Police conducted a vehicle check, and at that time, the petitioners herein are alleged to have illegally transported sand quarried from the Cauvery riverbed. Hence, a case has been registered against the accused for the aforesaid offences. Hence, this petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and their names have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/6
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that the property has been recovered, that no previous case is pending against the petitioners, and that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposes the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side, the nature of the offences charged against the petitioners, and the fact that the property has already been recovered and that no previous case is pending against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to certain conditions. 7.Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, on condition that the petitioners shall 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.II, Karur, within a 3/6
period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready and on further conditions that:
[a] the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure heir identity;
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders; [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. [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 4/6
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.
(R V J) 20.05.2026 TRP TO
1. Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur,
2. Inspector of Police, Vangal Police Station, Karur District.
3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J TRP
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.9498 of 2026 Date : 20/05/2026 6/6