Allowed

Kalimuthu v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC20 Dec 2023CRL OP(MD)/23037/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, Kalimuthu, under Section 438 Cr.P.C., who faced charges for illegally transporting red sand under Section 379 IPC and Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals Act. The court held the offence was not heinous.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on personal bond of Rs.10,000 subject to conditions including reporting to trial court and not tampering with evidence.

Kalimuthu Vs The Inspector of Police — Mining and Natural Resources | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

CRL OP(MD)No.23037 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶3

Date : 20.12.2023

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The Hon`ble MR JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

¶6

CRL OP(MD)No.23037 of 2023

¶7

Kalimuthu

¶8

... Petitioner / Sole Accused

¶9

¶10

The Inspector of Police, Chinthamanipatty Police Station, Karur District. (Crime No.212 of 2023) ... Respondent / Complainant

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Karuna, Advocate

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.R.Sureshkumar, Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶13

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

¶14

PRAYER :-

¶15

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.212 of 2023 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶16

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for

¶17

the offences punishable under Section 379 of IPC read with 21(1) of Mines and

¶18

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

¶19

1/5

¶20

CRL OP(MD)No.23037 of 2023

¶21

Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act, 1957 in Crime No.212 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶22

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner illegally transported one unit of red sand. Hence, the case.

¶23

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail.

¶24

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that the petitioner is having two previous cases and the investigation in this case is not yet completed.

¶25

5.Considering the facts of the case and taking into consideration the principles stated by the Honourable Supreme Court in Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia Etc., vs. State of Punjab reported in 1980 AIR 1632 and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2009)4 SCC 437 and Joginder Kumar vs. State of U.P. and others reported in (1994)4 SCC 260 and taking into consideration the origin of crime, it is seen that the offence alleged as against the petitioner is not a case of heinous crime. Further the petitioner is having permanent residence at Karur District. Hence the principles stated in Hussainara Khatoon & Ors vs. Home Secretary, State Of Bihar reported in AIR 1979 SC 1360 is taken into consideration. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

2/5

¶27

CRL OP(MD)No.23037 of 2023

¶28

In that case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has cautioned that pre-trial detention is not be encouraged nor is to be encourageable pre-trial release on sureties; that if the Court is satisfied after taking into consideration that the accused has his roots in the community and is not likely to abscond, he can safely be released on his personal bond.

¶29

7.In view of the above, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 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 on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kulithalai, Karur District on condition that the petitioner shall execute a own bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) 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 :

¶30

[a] the petitioner shall affix his photograph 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 his identity.

¶31

[b] the petitioner shall report before the trial Court on summons.

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

3/5

¶35

CRL OP(MD)No.23037 of 2023

¶36

investigation or trial.

¶37

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

¶38

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial

¶39

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].

¶40

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

¶41

sd/20/12/2023

¶42

/ TRUE COPY /

¶43

/01/2024 Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.I/II/III/IV) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶44

GNS

¶45

¶46