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

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Gajendran – Appellant
Versus
The Inspector of Police – Respondent
CRL OP(MD) 12264/2021



Advocates:
['M/s Sasidharan Tamilkani S T', '', 'Abinaya M', '', 'Public Prosecutor']

CRL OP(MD)No.12264 of 2021

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

(Criminal Jurisdiction)

Date : 26.08.2021

PRESENT

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice B.PUGALENDHI

CRL OP(MD)No.12264 of 2021

GAJENDRAN

... PETITIONER/SOLE ACCUSED

VS

THE STATE REP. BY,

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

THIRUVAIYARU POLICE STATION,

THANJAVUR DISTRICT.

(CRIME NO. 1246/2020). ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

For Petitioner : Mr.S.T.Sasidharam Tamilkani,

Advocate

For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy,

Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.438 of Cr.P.C

PRAYER :-

For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.1246 of 2020 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 police for the alleged offence punishable under Section

379 IPC and Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development &

Regulation) Act, 1957, in Crime No.1246 of 2020, seeks anticipatory

bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and others

have illegally transported 1/4 unit of river sand in bullock carts.

Hence, the present case has been registered.

1/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

CRL OP(MD)No.12264 of 2021

3.Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is an innocent and has not committed any offence as

alleged by the prosecution. However, a false case has been foisted

as against him and therefore, prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

4.Learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the

respondent police, on instructions, submits that the petitioner and

others have involved in illegal transportation of river sand. He

further submits that apart from this case, the petitioner is having

four previous cases to his credit. The details of such cases are as

follows:

i)Thiruvaiyaru Police Station, Cr.No.207 of 2021, u/s.379 IPC

r/w 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act.

ii)Thiruvaiyaru Police Station, Cr.No.1242 of 2020, u/s.379 IPC

r/w 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act.

iii)Thiruvaiyaru Police Station, Cr.No.1396 of 2020, u/s.379

IPC r/w 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act.

iv)Thiruvaiyaru Police Station, Cr.No.1470 of 2020, u/s.379 IPC

r/w 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act.

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the

nature of mineral transported and the antecedents of the petitioner,

this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the

petitioner. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands

dismissed.

6.It is needless to say that any tool or instrument or vehicle

used for illegal quarrying / transportation of sand is liable to be

seized under Section 21(4) of the Mines and Minerals(Development &

Regulation) Act, 1957 and any vehicle or instrument or tool which

has been seized under Section 21 (4) of the Mines and Minerals

(Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, is liable to be confiscated

under Section 21(4-A) of the Act.

7.Though the above provision mandates the authorities to

confiscate the tool or instrument or vehicle involved in the

commission of the offence of illegal quarrying / transportation of

sand, the authorities have not invoked the provision under Section

21(4-A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act,

1957 and therefore, a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.19936

of 2016, etc., batch has emphasized the need for confiscation of the

vehicles. Consequently, the Government has also issued certain

directions to the authorities of Revenue, Police and Forest and

Geology and Mining departments to seize the vehicles and for

confiscation of the same in G.O.Ms.No.170, Industries (MMC-II)

Department, dated 05.08.2020. Therefore, the respondent police is

2/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top