Allowed

Sasikumar v. The State by

Madras HC19 Nov 2024CRL OP/28750/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Lorry owner apprehending arrest for illegal sand mining sought anticipatory bail. The court noted his vehicle was allegedly used without his knowledge and no prior cases existed, granted bail on conditions including a Rs.10,000 deposit to the District Legal Services Authority.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on execution of Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to Rs.10,000 deposit to DLSA Vellore and daily reporting before respondent police at 10.30 a.m.

Sasikumar Vs The State by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.28750 of 2024

¶2

Crl.O.P.No.28750 of 2024

¶3

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶4

The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) and 326(a) of The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 r/w Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulations) Act, 1957 in Crime No.345 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶5

The case of the prosecution is that, the defacto complainant one Panchatcharam, lodged a complaint with the respondent police, stating that the petitioner along with other accused were involved in illegal mining of sand from the defacto complainant's land using JCB bearing Registration No.AP-21-AY9213 and two lorries bearing Registration Nos. TN-73-AC-3809 and TN-23CK-5911. Hence, this case.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner is the owner of the lorry, which is alleged to be involved in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has no previous

¶7

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

¶8

1/6

¶9

Crl.O.P.No.28750 of 2024

¶10

case and without his knowledge, his vehicle was used in illegal mining and further, he submitted that the petitioner without prejudice to his contentions, that the petitioner is prepared to deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards any charitable organization or association. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶11

Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the petitioner along with other accused had involved in illegal mining of sand from the defacto complainant's land using a JCB and two lorries. He would further submit that the petitioner herein is the owner of one of the lorry involved in this case and there is no previous case as against the petitioner. However, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶12

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

¶13

In respect of grant or refusal of anticipatory bail to the persons indulging in illegal sand mining, smuggling and theft of sand and minerals, the

¶14

Apex Court in S.Mohamed Shahul Hameed Vs. State rep. by the Inspector of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/6

¶15

Crl.O.P.No.28750 of 2024

¶16

Police (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.6029 of 2020 dated 11.12.2020), while expressing disagreement with the sweep observation made by this Court

¶17

on the aspect of continuous misuse of discretionary power by the offenders and the enforcers as well in an organised manner, has clarified that in consideration of anticipatory bail, the role assigned to a person would have to be considered.

¶18

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the petitioner herein is the owner of the vehicle and without his knowledge, his lorry was used in the illegal sand mining and that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, in order to curb illegal sand mining activities and taking into consideration the voluntary submission made by the petitioner offering to deposit a considerable amount to any charitable organization or association, this Court is of the opinion that as one of the conditions for grant of anticipatory bail, the petitioner may be directed to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the credit of District Legal Services Authority, Vellore District, without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court.

¶19

It is made clear that merely because the petitioner is depositing the

¶20

amount, it would not amount to the petitioner admitting his guilt in the criminal https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6

¶21

Crl.O.P.No.28750 of 2024

¶22

case and such amount is being paid without prejudice to the right of the petitioner.

¶23

Accordingly, the petitioner shall make a non refundable deposit of

¶24

Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) by way of Demand Draft/RTGS/NEFT to the credit of the District Legal Services Authority, Vellore District, and on such deposit and on receipt of proof of payment, 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, Katpadi on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-

¶25

(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties 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 conditions that:

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

4/6

¶30

Crl.O.P.No.28750 of 2024

¶31

or trial.

¶32

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

¶33

[d] 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 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];

¶34

[e] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

¶35

19.11.2024

¶36

stn

¶37

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

¶38

5/6

¶39

Crl.O.P.No.28750 of 2024