Allowed

Rajasekar v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC7 Apr 2022CRL OP(MD)/6364/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners in a case involving alleged illegal transportation of river sand under Section 379 IPC read with the Mines and Minerals Act. The Court imposed financial conditions and strict reporting and conduct obligations.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to payment of Rs. 7,500 each to the District Mineral Foundation and execution of a bond for Rs. 25,000 each with two sureties, along with specific reporting and condu

Rajasekar Vs The Inspector of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 07/04/2022

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.6364 of 2022

¶8

Rajasekar

¶9

Ragaventhiran ... Petitioners/Accused No.1 & 2

¶10

¶11

State rep.by

¶12

The Inspector of Police, Pattukottai Taluk Police Sation, Thanjavur District. (Crime.No.156 of 2022). ... Respondent/Complainant

¶13

For Petitioner : M/s.Porkodi Karunakaran.G., Advocate.

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.R.Sivakumar,

¶15

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶16

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

¶17

PRAYER :-

¶18

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.156 of 2022 on the file of the Respondent police.

¶19

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶20

The petitioners/A1 and A2, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 379 IPC r/w 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 in Crime No.156 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶21

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners have illegally transported one unit of river sand. Hence, the complaint.

¶22

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocents and they have been falsely implicated in this case. However, he would further submit that the petitioners https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ without prejudice to their right, are ready to deposit the amount that may be imposed by this Court.

¶23

¶24

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioners have transported one unit of river sand illegally.

¶25

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the nature of the offence alleged, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

¶26

6.Accordingly, the petitioners shall pay a sum of Rs.7,500/(Rupees Seven Thousand and Five Hundred only) each to the credit of the District Mineral Foundation Trust, Thanjavur District, without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the trial Court and produce the receipt/acknowledgment before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai.

¶27

7.On production of such receipt/acknowledgment, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukottai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that:

¶28

[a] the petitioners and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity.

¶29

[b] the petitioners shall report before respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one month and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

¶30

[c] the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶31

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶32

[e] 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 petitioners 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].

¶33

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

¶34

¶35

[f]If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.

¶36

Sd/07/04/2022 / TRUE COPY /

¶37

/ /2022 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.II) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. SJI Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶38

TO 1. THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, PATTUKOTTAI. 2. -DO- THROUGH THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, THANJAVUR DISTRICT AT KUMBAKONAM. 3. THE OFFICER INCHARGE, THE DISTRICT MINERAL FOUNDATION TRUST, THANJAVUR DISTRICT. 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLIE, PATTUKOTTAI TALUK POLICE STATION, THANJAVUR DISTRICT. 5. THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.6364 of 2022 Date :07/04/2022 SP/SVR/SAR II/13/04/2022/3P/6C

¶39

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

Rajasekar v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajasekar 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

Baskar @ Baskaran Vs The Inspector of Police

Thiru.C.Prabakara Rao Vs The Commissioner

The Management Vs The Special Deputy

United Labour Federation, Vs Government of Tamil Nadu

M.Kalavathi Vs The Commissioner

R.Arasu Vs The District Collector