Selvaraj, S/O.Velsamy Thevar Vs the Inspector of Police

1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Fifth day of April Two Thousand Nineteen

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

CRL OP(MD) No.5981 of 2019

¶6

SELVARAJ ... PETITIONER / ACCUSED NO.2

¶7

Vs

¶8

STATE REP. BY

¶9

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ACHANPUDUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

¶10

CRIME NO.115 OF 2019 ... RESPONDENT / COMPLAINANT

¶11

For Petitioner : MR.M.SHEMA DANIEL Advocate

¶12

For Respondent : MR.K.SUYAMBULINGA BHARATHI, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶13

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.

¶14

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶15

The petitioner, who is apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC (Sand theft) in Crime No.115 of 2019, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶16

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner transported 1 ½ unit of sand.

¶17

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. However, on instruction, he would further submit that the petitioner is ready to deposit any amount to the District Mineral Foundation Trust without prejudice to his rights.

¶18

The learned Government Advocate(Crl.side) appearing for the State submitted that the vehicle was seized by the respondent police and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. He further submitted that if the person is caught with illegal sand in the mining area, he has to be directed to deposit the conditional amount to the credit of Crime number. However, in view of formation of District Mineral Foundation Trust in each district, the amount https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ may be deposited to the credit of the said Trust for rehabilitation in the areas affected by illegal sand mining.

¶19

2

¶20

In view of the rehabilitation undertaken by the State Government under the Tamil Nadu District Mineral Foundation Rules, 2017, and in order to curb the illegal sand mining activities and also considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is directed to make a non refundable deposit of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the credit of the concerned District Mineral Foundation Trust, without prejudice to his rights and contentions. This amount so deposited shall be utilised by the Trust for rehabilitation works.

¶21

It is made clear that the deposit of the amount by the petitioner to the Trust would not amount to admission of guilt. The trial Court shall deal with the case independently on merits without reference to the amount deposited at the stage of anticipatory bail.

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submission made by the learned Government Advocate(Crl.side), I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶23

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 of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sehnkottai, Tirunelveli District 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 respondent Police or to the Police Officer, who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

¶24

(i) if the petitioner failed to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled.

¶25

(ii) the petitioner shall make a non refundable deposit of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) through demand draft to the credit of the Chairman/District Collector, District Mineral Foundation Trust of the concerned District, without prejudice to his defence before the trial Court and the learned Judicial Magistrate, after perusing the challan/ receipt, shall accept the sureties furnished by the petitioners;

¶26

(iii) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate/concerned court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶27

(iv) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police at 10.30.a.m., until further orders.

¶28

(v) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (vi) the petitioner shall not abscond either during https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ investigation or trial;

¶29

3

¶30

(vii) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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];

¶31

(viii) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

sd/-

25/04/2019

/ TRUE COPY /

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶36

TO

¶37

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, SHENKOTTAI, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT. 2 DO THROUGH THE CHEIF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUNVELVELI.

¶38

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ACHANPUDUR POLICE STATION, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

¶39

4 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. +1 CC to M/s.M.SEMA DANIEL, Advocate SR-7201

¶40

COPY TO: THE CHAIRMAN/DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DISTRICT MINERAL FOUNDATION TRUST, TIRUNELVELI DISTRICT.

¶41

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.5981 of 2019 Date :25/04/2019 JM/JC/SAR 1/29.04.2019/3P/7C

¶42

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Selvaraj, S/O.Velsamy Thevar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Selvaraj, S/O.Velsamy Thevar v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gnanatheebam Vs the Inspector of Police

Mr.N.Subramani Vs Mr.N.Velu

Kannan @ Damodaran Vs R.Vasudevan

R. Ajith Raja,S/O.Rajamanickam Vs the Inspector of Police

Madasamy, Vs the Inspector of Police

Kothaiammal Died Vs Murugesan