Raja @ Rajendhiran v. The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners herein apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 326(a), 303(2) of BNS Act (Corresponding Section 430, 379 of IPC) and Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 in Crime No.36 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seek anticipatory bail.

¶2The allegation against the petitioners is that they smuggled ¼ unit of river sand in a bullock cart. Hence, the complaint.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were innocent person and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and would fairly submitted that the petitioners have no previous case. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

¶5This Court is very serious in respect of exploitation of natural resources. However from the submission made by the learned Government Advocate, it appears that the petitioners have not come to adverse notice of the respondent. Taking into consideration of such peculiar aspects and also to give one opportunity for the petitioners to mend themselves, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.

¶6Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on they appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate -II, Tiruvannamalai, on condition that the petitioners 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:

(a) If the petitioners 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;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m. and 5.30 p.m for a period of 30 days;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. mp 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 [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioners thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

12.03.2026 mp To

1.The Judicial Magistrate -II, Tiruvannamalai.

2.The Inspector of Poli ce, Tiruvannamalai Taluk Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.OP.No.6201 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 12.03.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1. Raja @ Rajendhiran, S/o.Vengetraman 2. Prasanth, S/o.Sankar ... Petitioners Vs. The State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai Taluk Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. (Crime No.36 of 2026) … Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.36 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.E.Sathiyaraj Elangovan For Respondent : Mr.R.Kishore Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)