Allowed

Karthik v. State Rep.by

Madras HC13 Nov 2024CRL OP/28335/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, driver of vehicle allegedly carrying illegally transported river sand and in custody since 29.10.2024, sought bail. The court granted bail on condition of a Rs.5,000 non-refundable deposit to the District Legal Services Authority, Salem, with bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on Rs.5,000 non-refundable deposit to DLSA Salem, Rs.15,000 bond with two sureties, daily police reporting and other conditions.

Karthik Vs State Rep.by — Narcotics (NDPS) | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.28335 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 13.11.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.28335 of 2024

Karthik

... Petitioner

Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, Nangavalli Police Station, Salem District. (Crime No.220 of 2024).

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS Act, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection with the Crime No.220 of 2024, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sivakumar

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and

¶17

remanded to judicial custody on 29.10.2024, seeking bail in Crime No.220 of

¶18

2024 registered for the offence under Sections 303(2) of BNS and Section

¶19

21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957.

¶20

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

¶21

Crl.O.P.No.28335 of 2024

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that petitioner was found in possession of 1 unit of river sand. Hence the case.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 29.10.2024, he is also ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶24

Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing for grant of bail to the petitioner, submitted that totally 3 accused have been involved in this case, the petitioner is arrayed as A-2. He further submit that accused persons were illegally transported 1 unit of river sand and the petitioner is the driver of the vehicle and he has no previous case.

¶25

5. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted

¶26

that the petitioner, without prejudice to his defense and contention, is ready and willing to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- as non-refundable deposit to

¶27

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

¶28

Crl.O.P.No.28335 of 2024

¶29

any welfare scheme of the Government or any organization. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶30

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

¶31

On considering the voluntary submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- as non refundable deposit to "District Legal Services Authority, Salem", without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court.

¶32

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

¶33

Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances of

¶34

the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court

¶35

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

¶36

Crl.O.P.No.28335 of 2024

¶37

is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶38

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to make a non-refundable deposit of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five Thousand only) to the credit of "District Legal Services Authority, Salem" , without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court 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.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties , each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Learned Judicial Magistrate Court, No.I, Mettur, and on further conditions that:

¶39

[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;

¶40

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday evening at 6.30 p.m., until further orders;

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions,

¶44

4/6

¶45

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

¶46

Crl.O.P.No.28335 of 2024

¶47

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 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]; [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

¶48

13.11.2024

¶49

dsn

¶50

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

¶51

Crl.O.P.No.28335 of 2024

¶52

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.,J. dsn

¶53

¶54

The Judicial Magistrate Court, No.I, Mettur.

¶55

The Inspector of Police, Nangavalli Police Station, Salem District.

¶56

The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Omalur.

¶57

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶58

Crl.O.P.No.28335 of 2024

¶59

13.11.2024

¶60

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

Karthik v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karthik 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

Shanthi Vs the Inspector of Police

S Shanmugam Vs the Inspector of Police

Vasantharaj Vs State represented by

Parthipan Vs State Rep by

Mani Vs The State Rep by

M/S.Tej Ram Dharam Paul Pvt. Ltd. (Manufacture Company) Vs Food Safety Officer