SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 46017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. Srimathy, J
Dhanabalan – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamilnadu – Respondent
CRL OP(MD) No.9316 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Balamuruganantham R
For the Respondents: E. Antony Sahaya Prabahra

The court exercises discretion to grant anticipatory bail in cases of alleged illegal sand transportation, subject to specific conditions including financial sureties and reporting requirements, ensuring the accused remains available for investigation and trial.

Headnote:The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in connection with an alleged illegal transportation of gravel sand under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1959. The prosecution case alleged the owner of the vehicle transported illegal sand. The Court observed that given the nature of the offence and the petitioner's status as the vehicle owner, bail should be granted subject to strict conditions. The court addressed the issue of whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail under the prevailing circumstances. The ratio decidendi rests on the court's discretion to grant anticipatory bail while ensuring the presence of the accused and preventing the tampering of evidence through the imposition of specific security and reporting conditions, relying on the principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding bail breach consequences. The court allowed the petition and ordered the petitioner to be released on anticipatory bail upon execution of a bond and compliance with reporting and deposit conditions.

Table of Content
1. summary of the alleged offence leading to the anticipatory bail application. (Para 1 , 2)
2. summary of the prosecution's contention regarding the petitioner's involvement as vehicle owner. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's decision to grant bail with conditions to ensure investigation integrity. (Para 5 , 6)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 07/05/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Dhanabalan ... Petitioner Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep.By, The Inspector of Police, Kalaiyarkovil Police Station,Sivagangai District (In Cr.No.163 of 2026). ... Respondent PRAYER :-

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.163 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner : Mr. Balamuruganantham R, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.E. Antony Sahaya Prabahra, Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2) BNS, 2023 and Section 21(4) of MMDR Act, 1959 in Crime No.163 of

2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein is said to have illegally transported 6 units of gravel sand by using a Taurus Lorry.

Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner herein is owner of the vehicle and the investigation of the case is pending.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Police.

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the petitioner is owner of the vehicle, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, with certain conditions.

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, 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 No.I, Sivagangai, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy is made ready and on further conditions that:

(a) the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure heir identity;

[b] the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.

1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) to the credit of District Siddha Medical Officer CCRIPKM (Account No:-10767823177, IFSC Code:- SBIN0000898, State Bank of India, Periyakulam Branch), without prejudice to his rights and contentions before the trial Court and produce the receipt/acknowledgment before the concerned Court while executing sureties;

(c) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 am for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

(d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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] and;

(g) if the accused/petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS, 2023.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top