Allowed

Anandharajan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Narikudi

Madras HC8 Jun 2026CRL OP(MD)/10322/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court granted bail to the petitioner, who was accused of illegally transporting small rough stones without a permit under the Mines Act and BNS. The court considered the nature of the offence, lack of prior cases, and time spent in custody while imposing specific conditions on bond and reporting.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties, subject to conditions of reporting and non-absconding.

Anandharajan Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of… — Specific Performance | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CRL OP(MD). No.10322 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 08/06/2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶7

CRL OP(MD). No.10322 of 2026

¶8

Anandharajan

¶9

... Petitioner/Accused

¶10

¶11

State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Narikudi Police Station, Virudhunagar District. Crime No. 127 of 2026..

¶12

... Respondent/Complainant

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.R. Udhayakumar,

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶15

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS

¶16

PRAYER :-

¶17

For Bail in Crime No. 127 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

¶18

1/6

¶19

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

¶20

CRL OP(MD). No.10322 of 2026

¶21

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶22

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) of BNS r/w Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 in Crime No. 127 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶23

The case of the prosecution is that 23.05.2026 at about 15.30 hours, the respondent police intercepted the vehicle of the petitioner near Vidathakulam Bus Stop, Tiruchuli Taluk and found that the petitioner was illegally transporting 5 ½ units of small rough stones without any valid permit. Hence the case.

¶24

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.05.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

¶25

2/6

¶26

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

¶27

CRL OP(MD). No.10322 of 2026

¶28

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing

¶29

for the respondent would submit that though the petitioner has no previous cases, considering the nature of offence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶30

This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶31

6.Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the nature of the offence and considering the fact that the petitioner has no previous case pending at his credit and the quantity of mineral involved in this case as well as the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

¶32

[a] Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial

¶33

3/6

¶34

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

¶35

CRL OP(MD). No.10322 of 2026

¶36

Magistrate, Thiruchulli, Virudhunagar District , and on further conditions that:

¶37

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four

¶38

weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

¶39

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar

¶40

to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

¶41

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

¶42

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

¶43

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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

¶44

4/6

¶45

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

¶46

CRL OP(MD). No.10322 of 2026

¶47

released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself

¶48

as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs.

¶49

State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

¶50

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can

¶51

be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J)

08.06.2026

PNM

The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchulli, Virudhunagar District.

¶57

Do-Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Viruthunagar District.

¶58

The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District.

¶59

The Inspector of Police, Narikudi Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

¶60

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶61

5/6

¶62

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

¶63

CRL OP(MD). No.10322 of 2026

¶64

P. DHANABAL,J

¶65

PNM

¶66

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10322 of 2026

¶67

Date : 08/06/2026

¶68

6/6

¶69

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

Anandharajan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Narikudi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anandharajan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Narikudi

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

Ajith Kumar @ Mahendran Ajithkumar Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Kadamalaikundu

G.Yogarani Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Peraiyur

Shanmugaraj Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Awps-Kodaikanal

Balachandar Vs The Inspector of Police

Nanthaprabhakaran Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Ramanatham

Vishnu Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thiruvonam