Gobinath v. The State of Tamilnadu Rep by the Inspector of Police, Velayuthapattinam

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 21.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 7849 of 2026 Gobinath ... Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Velayuthapattinam Police Station, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District. (Crime No.33 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Balasubramanian

Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 33 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) of BNS and Section 21(4) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, in Crime No.33 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Section is wrongly mentioned in the petition as '24(1)' instead of '21(4)'. The same is Corrected.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 14.04.2026 at 06.30 p.m., on the secret information, the respondent police intercepted the vehicle and found that the petitioner is illegally transporting ½ unit of sand without any valid permission. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that the offences are grave in nature. The petitioner is involved in theft of valuable minerals. He opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, the petitioner has one previous case. Hence, the case.

¶5Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, considering the minerals involved, though the petitioner has one previous case, the same was already disposed of and considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory 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 Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police at 10.30 a.m., on every Saturday for a period of four weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [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 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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

(P D B J)

21.04.2026 TM To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Velayuthapattinam Police Station, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District. (Crime No.33 of 2026)

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

P. DHANABAL, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 7849 of 2026 Date : 21.04.2026