Allowed

Jeysankar v. the State Rep by

Madras HC6 Aug 2021CRL OP/13717/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner charged with illegal sand mining. The petitioner was ordered to execute a bond with sureties and deposit Rs. 10,000 to the District Mineral Foundation Trust for rehabilitation purposes.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to execution of bond with sureties, daily police reporting, and non-refundable deposit of Rs. 10,000 to the District Mineral Foundation Trust.

Jeysankar Vs the State Rep by — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Friday, the Sixth day of August Two Thousand Twenty One

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble Mr Justice M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION No.13717 of 2021

¶7

JEYSANKAR [ PETITIONER / ACCUSED ]

¶8

¶9

THE STATE REP BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T.PALUR POLICE STATION, ARIYALUR DISTRICT. CR NO.950/2020

¶10

For Petitioner : M/S.M.SELVAM Advocate

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :-

¶14

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence under Sections 379 of IPC r/w 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, in Crime No.950 of 2020 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶15

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had illegally transported ¼ unit of river sand by using bullock cart, without any permission. Hence, the complaint.

¶16

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. However, on instructions, he further submit that the petitioner, without prejudice to his rights, on his own volition, is ready to deposit the amount of Rs.10,000/- to the credit of the concerned District Mineral Foundation Trust.

¶17

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that the vehicle involved 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,

¶18

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

¶19

necessarily he could be released on bail by imposing condition 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.

¶20

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.

¶21

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.

¶22

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 with certain conditions.

¶23

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 District Session Judge, Ariyalur. 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:

¶24

(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;

¶25

(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;

¶26

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

¶27

(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;

¶28

(d)the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

¶29

(e)the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶30

(f)the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶31

(g)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]; and;

¶32

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

¶33

-sd/-

¶34

06/08/2021

¶35

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

¶36

TRUE COPY

¶37

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

¶38

¶39

1 THE DISTRICT SESSION JUDGE, ARIYALUR.

¶40

2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T.PALUR POLICE STATION, ARIYALUR DISTRICT.

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

4 THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT, MADRAS.

¶44

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

¶45

INBA 31/08/2021

¶46

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

Jeysankar v. the State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeysankar 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

Siva Vs State by

Ravi Venkatachalapathy Vs State Rep by

S.Anand (Rp No 7143) Vs the State by

J.Rajendran (54) Vs K.B.Indira (48)

Vive @ Vickraman Vs the Station House Officer

S.Shankar Vs D.Anushya