Dismissed¶25

T.v.Gopi v. The State rep by the Inspector of Police

Madras HC16 Apr 2026CRL OP/9404/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; CRL OP No. 9404 of 2026; decided 16-04-2026 by C.Kumarappan J.; anticipatory bail under S.482 BNSS dismissed; alleged offences S.303(2) and 326 BNS Act r/w 21(1) Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957; illegal transport of 8 units of gravel sand in a lorry; Crime No.160 of 2026, Thiruthani Police Station, Thiruvallur District; petitioner T.V.Gopi; two previous cases cited by Government Advocate; misuse of earlier bail liberty; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The Court held that the petitioner had misused the liberty earlier granted by this Court, and therefore this is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. ¶25

T.v.Gopi Vs The State rep by the Inspector of… — Mining and Natural Resources | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CRL OP No. 9404 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 16-04-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 9404 of 2026

T.V.Gopi

..Petitioner(s)

The State rep by The Sub Inspector of Police Thiruthani Police Station, Thiruvallur District. (Crime No.160 of 2026)

¶10

..Respondent(s)

¶11

Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with in Crime No.160 of 2026 on the file of respondent Police and thus render justice.

¶12

For Petitioner(s): M/s. V. Manimaran For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 303 (2), 326 of BNS Act, r/w 21 (1) Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, in Crime No.160 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

¶15

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had illegally

¶16

transported 8 units of gravel sand in a lorry. Hence, the case.

¶17

Page1 of 2

¶18

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

¶19

CRL OP No. 9404 of 2026

¶20

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

¶21

3 .The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is

¶22

innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that

¶23

he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶24

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and further submitted that petitioner has two previous cases and has been regularly doing similar nature of offences. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.

¶25

5.From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side), it is pellucid that the petitioner has misused the liberty which had been granted by this Court in earlier point of time. Hence, this is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed.

¶26

16-04-2026

¶27

ep To

¶28

1.The Sub Inspector of Police Thiruthani Police Station, Thiruvallur District. 2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

¶29

CRL OP No. 9404 of 2026

¶30

__________ Page2 of 2

¶31

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