Allowed

A Manivannan v. State Rep by Inspector of Police

Madras HC29 Apr 2026CRL OP/10885/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a criminal miscellaneous petition. The petitioner faced charges related to illegal transportation of red soil without a valid license. The court imposed strict conditions, including a bond, deposit to the Legal Services Authority, regular police reporting, and prohibitions against tampering with evidence or absconding.

What did the court decide?

Order to release petitioner on anticipatory bail subject to bond, deposit, reporting conditions, and undertakings.

A Manivannan Vs State Rep by Inspector of Police — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CRL OP No. 10885 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 29-04-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

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

¶6

CRL OP No. 10885 of 2026

A.Manivannan

..Petitioner(s)

State Rep by Inspector of Police Karipatti Police Station, Salem District. Crime No.18 of 2026

¶11

..Respondent(s)

¶12

Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner/ Accused on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.18 of 2026 on the file of Inspector of Police, Karipatti Police Station, Salem District.

¶13

For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.Murugan For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Dhileepan Govt.Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for offences punishable under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, read with Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, in Crime No. 18 of 2026, seeks

¶16

Page1 of 6

¶17

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

¶18

CRL OP No. 10885 of 2026

¶19

anticipatory bail.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner, while pleading innocence and alleging false implication, seeks the indulgence of this Court. He submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen with no prior bad antecedents and is willing to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

¶21

The case of the prosecution, as put forth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing the grant of anticipatory bail, is that the petitioner had illegally transported 3 tonnes of red soil in a lorry bearing Registration No. TN 20 BQ 8998 without any valid licence.

¶22

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

¶23

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, and considering the fact that the petitioner has no bad antecedents and that custodial interrogation is not required

¶24

Page2 of 6

¶25

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

¶26

CRL OP No. 10885 of 2026

¶27

at this stage, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

¶28

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 is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistratecum-District Munsif, Vazhapadi, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions that:

¶29

[a] The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.15,000/-

¶30

(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) as a non-refundable donation to the District Legal Services Authority, Salem and shall produce the original receipt of such deposit before the concerned Magistrate at the time of executing the bond.

¶31

[b] If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

¶32

[c] The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for suretyship

¶33

Page3 of 6

¶34

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

¶35

CRL OP No. 10885 of 2026

¶36

(Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity;

¶37

[d] The petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m and as and when required for interrogation;

¶38

[e] The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses and shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶39

[f] The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police officer as and when required;

¶40

[g] The petitioner shall give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for Police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he will comply with the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

¶41

[h] The petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶42

[i] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take

¶43

Page4 of 6

¶44

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

¶45

CRL OP No. 10885 of 2026

¶46

appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala

¶47

[(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

¶48

[j] If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

¶49

29-04-2026

¶50

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶51

Jeni

¶52

¶53

1.The Judicial Magistrate-cum-District Munsif, Vazhapadi.

¶54

2.The Inspector of Police, Karipatti Police Station, Salem District.

¶55

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

¶56

4.The District Legal Services Authority, Salem.

¶57

__________ Page5 of 6

¶58

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

¶59

CRL OP No. 10885 of 2026

¶60

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶61

Jeni

¶62

CRL OP No. 10885 of 2026

¶63

29-04-2026

¶64

__________ Page6 of 6

¶65

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

A Manivannan v. State Rep by Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A Manivannan v. State Rep by Inspector of Police

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

Paulrajan Vs State by its Inspector of Police

Yuvaraj Vs State By Inspector of Police

R.Rajesh Vs The State Rep By, The Sub-Inspector Of Police

Vijaya Kumar Vs State by Inspector of Police

Murugaiyan Vs State rep. by its Insepctor of Police

Vignesh Vs State rep by