Senthil v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Sethubavhathiram

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 19.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 11639 of 2026 Senthil ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Sethubavathiram Police Station, Thanjavur District.

(Crime No.179 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Karunakaran Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 179 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 Section 303(2) of BNS r/w 21(1) of MMDR Act, in Crime No.179 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks 1/5

anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on secret information the respondent police went to the scene of occurrence and found that the petitioner along with other accused involved in illegal transportation of 1⁄4 unit of river sand. 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. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the offences are grave in nature. The petitioner along with other accused persons committed theft of valuable minerals. The petitioner has no previous case. Investigation is still pending. He vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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 quantity of minerals, and nature of minerals, the petitioner has no previous case and considering all other 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 bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai, on condition that the petitioner 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[b] the petitioner 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 petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

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

3/5

[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) 19.06.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Sethubavathiram Police Station, Thanjavur District.

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

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 11639 of 2026 Date : 19.06.2026 5/5