The High Court refused anticipatory bail to petitioners in a criminal case regarding illegal transport of river sand under IPC and Mines & Minerals Act. The court held it was not inclined to grant bail and dismissed the petition.
Application for anticipatory bail dismissed; criminal original petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.O.P.No.20351 of 202 3
Crl.O.P.No.20351 of 2023
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
The Petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the Respondent
police for the offence punishable under Section 379 & 430 IPC and 21(1) of Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act in Crime No.363 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the Respondent Police submitted that on 10.06.2022, the Petitioners illegally transported 3½ units of river sand.
4.Taking into consideration the facts and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either sides and the fact that the matter is arising out of illegal transport of river sand, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioners.
5.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
08.09.2023
sai
1/ 2
Crl.O.P.No.20351 of 202 3
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
sai
Crl.O.P.No.20351 of 2023
08.09.2023
2/ 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to petitioners apprehending arrest for illegal transport of river sand.
Whether the facts of illegal transport of sand justify denial of anticipatory bail.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioners
Respondent Police
RMT TEEKAA RAMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
