Allowed

Varatharajan v. the State Rep by

Madras HC5 Aug 2021CRL OP/13665/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner regarding allegations of illegal sand transportation. Bail is conditioned on a non-refundable deposit of Rs. 10,000 to the District Mineral Foundation Trust, execution of a bond, reporting daily for two weeks, and refraining from tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is granted bail conditioned on a non-refundable deposit of Rs. 10,000 to the District Mineral Foundation Trust, execution of a bond with two sureties, daily reporting for two weeks, and

Varatharajan Vs the State Rep by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Thursday, the Fifth day of August Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.13665 of 2021

¶7

VARATHARAJAN [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶8

Vs THE STATE REP BY [ RESPONDENT ] THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T.PALUR POLICE STATION, ARIYALUR DISTRICT. CR NO.385/2021

¶9

For Petitioner : M/S.R.SUBRAMANIAN Advocate

¶10

For Respondent : MR. C.E.PRATAP, Govt. Advocate ( Crl. Side)

¶11

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

¶12

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶13

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Section 379 of IPC r/w 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 in Crime No.385 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶14

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has involved in illegal transportation of ¼ unit of sand by using bullock cart. Hence the complaint was registered.

¶15

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. However, on instructions, he further submitted that the petitioner, without prejudice to his rights, is ready to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the credit of the concerned District Mineral Foundation Trust that may be imposed by this Court.

¶16

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that if the person is caught with illegal sand in the mining area, necessarily he could be released on bail by imposing of deposit of any amount as may be ordered by this Court. In view of formation of District Mineral Foundation Trust in each District, the amount may be directed to be deposited to the credit of the said Trust for rehabilitation in the areas affected by illegal sand mining.

¶17

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

¶18

5.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 may be directed to make a non refundable deposit of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) to the credit of the concerned District Mineral Foundation Trust, without prejudice to his rights and contentions. The amount so deposited shall be utilised by the Trust for rehabilitation works.

¶19

6.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.

¶20

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

¶21

8.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 No.I, Jayamkondam, 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 the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

¶22

(a) 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;

¶23

(b) the petitioner shall make a non refundable deposit of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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 petitioner;

¶24

(c) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Court concerned may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶25

(d)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

¶26

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

¶27

(f)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation

¶28

or trial;

¶29

(g)on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned

¶30

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]; and;

¶31

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

¶32

This order, on being produced, be punctually observed and carried into execution by all concerned

¶33

TRUE COPY

¶34

Sub-Assistant Registrar (Statistics/C.S.) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

¶35

¶36

1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.I, JAYAMKONDAM.

¶37

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, ARIYALUR DISTRICT (FOR INFORMATION).

¶38

3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T.PALUR POLICE STATION, ARIYALUR DISTRICT.

¶39

4 THE CHAIRMAN / DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DISTRICT MINERAL FOUNDATION TRUST, ARIYALUR DISTRICT.

¶40

5 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶41

CC to M/S.R.SUBRAMANIAN Advocate on payment of necessary charges

¶42

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ INBA 16/08/2021

Varatharajan v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varatharajan v. the State Rep by

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

C.K.Dilip Kumar Vs State Rep by

Khader Humayun Vs the State Rep by

Govindasamy Vs State Rep by

Yugaselvan Vs Renuka

A.Raajendher Vs State Rep by

Gopinath Vs State Rep.by