VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

A Raju v. The State of Tamilnadu Rep.By

GRANTED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
25 June 2026
Bench
P.Dhanabalauthor
Case no.
CRL OP(MD) 12477/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow P.Dhanabal

Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 25/06/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL A.Raju ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep.By, The Inspector of Police, Arumanai Police Station, Kanyakumari District. (Crime No.76/2026). ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.76 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner : M/s.G.Anto Prince, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Counsel For State of TN (Crl.Side) 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) and 62 of of BNS, 2023, and Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, in Crime No.76 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 02.04.2026 at about 05.30 a.m, while the respondent police were on routine patrol duty at Arumanai to Uthiramcode Road, they noticed a parked Tempo vehicle Reg.No.TN-59-BT-3088 at Vandalamgarden and on searching, they found that it was loaded with rubble granite stones without any valid permission. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he he is no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that already the alleged mines was seized along with the vehicle. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the offence committed by the accused is grave in nature and the investigation is still pending and the petitioner has 2 previous cases. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶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, and the quantity of minerals involved in this case and the alleged mineral was already seized along with the vehicle and though the prosecution stated that the petitioner has 2 previous cases, in those cases, he was released on bail, hence, 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 bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District, on condition that the petitioner shall 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 concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 4 weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the 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.

25.06.2026 dss

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Arumanai Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. CRLoOP(MD).oNo.12477oofo2026 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooP.oDHANABAL,J oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooodss oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooORDER oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooIN oooooooooooooooooooooooooCRLoOP(MD)oNo.12477oofo2026 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooDateoo:o25/06/2026

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.