Karthick v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 29/06/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Karthick ... Petitioner/Accused No.3 Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Devipattinam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

Cr.No.114/2026.

... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No.114 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : S.Sivaprakash, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Counsel For State of TN (Crl.Side) 1/6

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.06.2026 for the alleged offence under Section 21(1) & 303(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.114 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 15.06.2026, at about 3.00 a.m., the petitioner, along with the other accused, was allegedly engaged in the illegal quarrying of approximately 11⁄2 units of sand from a patta land by using a JCB and a tractor. Based on the said allegations, the respondent police registered the present case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He would further submit that the sand was quarried from patta land and that the petitioner has no previous antecedents and the co-accused (A1 & A2) were released on bail. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner. 2/6

4. The learned Counsel For State of TN (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and reported that the petitioner joining hands with other accused illegally transported 1 1⁄2 units of sand. He further submitted that totally there are 5 accused and that the petitioner is ranked as A3. He also submitted that no previous case has been registered against the petitioner. Further, it is stated that all the five accused were arrested and subsequently, the co-accused (A1 & A2) were released on bail. However, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of incarceration and the quantity of minerals involved in this case and already the co-accused were released on bail and also no previous case has been registered against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of 3/6

Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Ramanathapuram, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.00 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[c] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[d] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 29.06.2026 dss 4/6

To:

1. The Judicial Magistrate-I, Ramanathapuram.

2. The Inspector of Police, Devipattinam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

3.The Superintendent, District Jail, Ramanathapuram District. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 5/6

K. RAJASEKAR,J dss

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12590 of 2026 Date : 29/06/2026 6/6