Dismissed

N.Saravanan v. State Rep.by

Madras HC28 Sept 2020CRL OP/15249/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Madras dismissed a Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The Court held that discretionary powers under Section 438 cannot be extended to persons indulging in illegal sand mining, smuggling, and theft of minerals due to the environmental damage caused.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail was dismissed.

N.Saravanan Vs State Rep.by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 28.09.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.15249 of 2020

¶6

1.N.Saravanan 2.M.Sakthi ... Petitioners

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State represented by The Inspector Of Police, Palacode Police Station, Dharmapuri District. (Cr.No.1565 of 2020) ... Respondent

¶9

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.1565 of 2020 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

¶10

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Suthan

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz. Additional Public Prosecutor O R D E R (The case has been heard through video conference)

¶12

The petitioners who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC in Crime No.1565 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶13

The case of the prosecution as per the defacto complainant, the Inspector of Police is that while he was on his usual rounds, he had seen the accused had without any permission from the Government, dug and taken sand. Hence, the complaint.

¶14

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶15

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner without obtaining any permission from the Government, had illegally dugged the land and transported sand, thereby degraded the environment and caused damages to the ecology. Hence, he vehemently opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶16

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

¶17

This Court is of the opinion that the offenders, despite several orders being passed by various benches of this Court regarding illegal sand mining and quarrying knowing fully well about the evil consequences affecting the environment and society at large and the implications thereon, are indulging in the offences of illegal quarrying/mining, theft and smuggling of sand and minerals. These cases come within the category of cases of large magnitude affecting and impacting livelihood of a very large number of people knowingly and unknowingly.

¶18

This Court finds that the discretionary power has been consciously and continuously misused by the offenders in an organised manner and this Court is of the firm opinion that the discretionary powers cannot be extended to persons indulging in illegal sand mining, smuggling and theft of sand and minerals.

¶19

Hence, in view of the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.13334 of 2020 etc., batch dated 03.09.2020, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

¶20

-sd/28/09/2020 This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned TRUE COPY

¶21

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, NO.II, PALACODE, DHARMAPURI DISTRICT.

¶22

2 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶23

3 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALACODE POLICE STATION, DHARMAPURI DISTRICT.

¶24

CC to M/S.K.SUTHAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges

CRL OP.15249/2020

Date :28/09/2020

RVR 06/10/2020

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

N.Saravanan v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Saravanan v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saravanan Vs the State Rep by

Raja Vs State Rep by

Murali Vs State Rep by

Dinesh Kumar Vs the State by

Kumar @ Krishnasamy Vs the Inspector of Police

Dinesh @ Pambu Dinesh Vs the State Rep.by