Muthukumar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Chettinadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 12/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. Muthukumar, S/o. Mannaiah, No.215/1, Senkarai, Periyakottai, Sivagangai District..

2. Gomathinayagam, S/o. Sankaran, No.9, Kalyana Sundaranar Stseet,V.O.C. Road, Karaikudi,Sivagangai District.

3. Michael Stephan, S/o.Siluvai Manickam, Thalimarungur, Thinaiyathur, Ramanathapuram District..

4. Selvi Michaeldoss, W/o. Michael Doss, No.2/247, Mgr Salai, Kalaiayappa Nagar, Kalanivasal, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.

5. Thondiraj, S/o.Chinnathambi, No.2 / 1916, Jeyanthi Illam, Burma Colony, Vallal Alagappa Nagar, Sekkalai Kottai, Sivagangai District.

... Petitioners/A1 to A5 1/8

Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Chettinadu Police Station, Sivagangai District.

Crime No.45/2026.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.P. Chellappandian, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-33AB. For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.

45/2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A1 to A5, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 303(2) of BNS, 2023, and Section 21(4) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, in Crime 2/8

No.45 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the complaint lodged by the Village Administrative officer/defacto complainant, on 06.06.2026, while the defacto complainant along with her subordinates, conducted a vehicle inspection near Nemathanpatti Police Station, at that time, they found that the petitioners along with other accused persons had illegally transported 3 1⁄2 units of Jalli and 3 units of Msand by using vehicles bearing Registration Nos. TN 48 K 1768, TN 63 BX 6386 and TN 63 AS 5159 without any valid permission. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they were falsely implicated in this 3/8

case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the petitioners had illegally transported jalli and M-sand without any permission. He would further submit that the petitioners have no previous cases. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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 petitioners and the quantity of the materials involved in this case, and also 4/8

considering the fact that the petitioners have no previous cases and the materials have been seized and the material part of the investigation might have been completed and hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made reay, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, karaikudi, on condition that the petitioners shall 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 concerned and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report 5/8

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 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.

[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 6/8

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) 12.06.2026 vsg TO 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate, Karaikudi. 2.The Inspector of Police, Chettinadu Police Station, Sivagangai District.

3. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

7/8

P. DHANABAL,J., vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10994 of 2026 Date : 12/06/2026 8/8