Allowed

Arulraj @ Arulselvam v. State Rep.by

Madras HC5 Jun 2023CRL OP/8320/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Criminal O.P., the Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner accused of illegal river sand transportation. The order was issued after the petitioner's previous bail had lapsed due to failure to execute sureties, with specific conditions including a non-refundable deposit and strict reporting requirements.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail subject to deposit of Rs. 2,000, execution of a bond for Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, daily police reporting at 10:30 a.m., and adherence to strict conditions reg

Arulraj @ Arulselvam Vs State Rep.by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.8320 of 2023

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.8320 of 2023

¶3

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J.

¶4

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 379 of IPC r/w Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, in Crime No. 774 of 2021, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶5

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused were involved in illegal transportation of 1/2 unit of river sand by using bullock cart. Hence, the complaint.

¶6

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this is the third application for anticipatory bail and the petitioner was earlier granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.13850 of 2022 with a condition to deposit a sum of Rs.3,000/- as non refundable deposit to the credit of Registered Advocate Clerk Association, Ariyalur District. Due to paucity of funds, he was unable to execute the sureties in time and the order has got lapsed. He further submit that the petitioner is prepared to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶7

Page 1 of 4

¶8

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

¶9

Crl.O.P.No.8320 of 2023

¶10

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit

¶11

that the petitionerwas already granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.13850 of 2022 on 16.06.2022. He would further submit that he failed to execute the sureties within time and thereby, the earlier order has got lapsed. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) and perused the materials available on record.

¶13

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions made on both sides, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶14

Accordingly, the petitioner shall make a non-refundable deposit of a sum of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) to the credit of Taluk Legal Services Authority attached to the Court concerned and on such deposit and production of proof, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a

¶15

Page 2 of 4

¶16

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

¶17

Crl.O.P.No.8320 of 2023

¶18

period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready,

¶19

before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Jayankondam, 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, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶20

[a] the petitioner and 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.

¶21

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

[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

¶25

Page 3 of 4

¶26

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

¶27

Crl.O.P.No.8320 of 2023

¶28

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J.

¶29

drl

¶30

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].

¶31

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

¶32

05.06.2023

¶33

drl

¶34

Crl.O.P.No.8320 of 2023

¶35

Page 4 of 4

¶36

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

Arulraj @ Arulselvam v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arulraj @ Arulselvam 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

C.R.Hari Pratap Vs the State Rep by

M.Kuppusamy Vs Inspector of Police

M R Preeja Vs State Rep by

Vijay Varma Vs State Rep.by Its the Inspector of Police

Raanjith Vs State Rep.by

Janarthanan Vs the Inspector of Police