Allowed

Sarath Kumar v. State Rep by

Madras HC22 Nov 2023CRL OP/26511/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras granted bail to the petitioner, the first accused in a case concerning illegal transportation of river sand, subject to a non-refundable deposit of Rs. 5,000 and strict reporting conditions.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was released on bail subject to a non-refundable deposit of Rs. 5,000, a bond for Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, daily reporting for two weeks, and prohibitions against absconding or tam

Sarath Kumar Vs State Rep by — Corruption | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.26511 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 22.11.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.26511 of 2023

¶7

Sarath Kumar S/o. Kesavan

¶8

...Petitioner/Accused-1

¶9

Vs.

¶10

State represented by the The Inspector of Police, Virudampet Police Station, Vellore District.

¶11

(Crime No.334 of 2023) ...Respondent

¶12

PRAYER:

¶13

Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No. 334 of 2023 on the file of respondent police on such terms and conditions.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mariappan For Respondent : Mr.R.Kishore Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶15

1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

Crl.O.P.No.26511 of 2023

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner is the 1^st accused in Crime No.334 of 2023, registered by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 379 & 430 of IPC r/w Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, and he had been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.11.2023, seeks bail.

¶19

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was alleged to have transported 25 kgs of river sand in three bags in a Honda Activa scooter. Hence the complaint.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further stated that the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶21

2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

Crl.O.P.No.26511 of 2023

¶23

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the

¶24

respondent stated that the petitioner has illegally transported 25 kgs of river sand in three bags in a two-wheeler. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶25

In order to curb illegal sand mining activities, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/(Rupees Five Thousand only) as non refundable deposit to the credit of District Revenue Officer, Vellore District, without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court.

¶26

Merely, because the petitioner deposits the said amount, it

¶27

would not amount to admission of his guilt. Therefore, it is open to the trial Court to deal with the case independently.

¶28

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and the

¶29

submissions made by the learned counsels, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶30

3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

Crl.O.P.No.26511 of 2023

¶32

Accordingly, the petitioner shall make a non-refundable deposit of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the credit of District Revenue Officer, Vellore District, and on such deposit and production of proof, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing 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 Judicial Magistrate No.III, Vellore, and on further conditions that :-

¶33

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

¶34

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

¶35

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

¶36

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.

¶37

[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

¶38

4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

Crl.O.P.No.26511 of 2023

¶40

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].

¶41

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR

¶42

can be registered under Section 229A IPC.

22.11.2023

ata/rjr

The Judicial Magistrate No.III, Vellore.

¶47

The Central Prison, Vellore.

¶48

3.The Inspector of Police, Virudampet Police Station, Vellore District.

¶49

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras

¶50

5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶51

Crl.O.P.No.26511 of 2023

¶52

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN. J.

¶53

ata

¶54

Crl.O.P.No.26511 of 2023

¶55

22.11.2023

¶56

6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Sarath Kumar v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarath Kumar 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Ravikumar Vs the Inspector of Police

J.Vijayalakshmi Vs Police Department

Senthilkumar Vs Inspector of Police

Dinesh Kumar Vs State Rep by

Vadivel @ Vadivelan Vs State by

N.Dinesh Vs Inspector of Police