CRL OP(MD)/17988/2017 of SURESH, Vs THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, on 28 December 2017

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT( Criminal Jurisdiction )

Thursday, the Twenty Eighth day of December Two Thousand Seventeen PRESENT

The Hon`ble Mr Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN

CRL OP(MD) No.17988 of 2017

SURESH

... PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.3

Vs

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NAINARKOIL POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPRUAM DISTRICT. IN CR.NO.279 OF 2017.... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

For Petitioner : Mr.M.JERIN MATHEW Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.ANBARASAN, Government Advocate (Crl.side)

PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C.

ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner/A3, who was arrested and remanded tojudicial custody on 17.12.2017 for the offences punishable underSections 353, 379 and 430 IPC, Section 3 of TNPPDL Act and Section21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957in Crime No.279 of 2017 on the file of the respondent police, seeksbail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 and A2 in thiscase are said to have indulged in illegal mining of sand and thePolice seized the vehicle and took the same to the Police Stationand at that time, the petitioner and A4 intervened and prevented thePolice Officials from discharging their official duties, whichresulted in registration of the present case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submittedthat the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and heis ready to abide by any conditions being imposed by this Court.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) has stronglyobjected to the grant of bail, contending that except thispetitioner, others have absconded and the investigation of the caseis at the initial stage and if the petitioner/accused is let out onhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/bail, there is every possibility of the accused tampering thewitnesses/evidences and hampering the investigation.

5. Taking into consideration the serious nature of theallegations levelled against this petitioner and the fact that hewas taken into custody only from 17.12.2017 and also the fact thatapart from IPC offences, he has committed offences punishable underthe provisions of TNPPD Act and Mines and Minerals (Development &Regulation) Act, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief asprayed for by the petitioner.

6. In the result, this Criminal Original Petition standsdismissed accordingly.

sd/-

28/12/2017

/ TRUE COPY /

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TO

1 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,NAINARKOIL POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPRUAM DISTRICT.NAINARKOIL POLICE STATION, RAMANATHAPRUAM DISTRICT.

2THE OFFICER IN CHARGE,SUB JAIL, MUTHUKULATHOOR.

3 THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI

+1. CC to M/S.M.JERIN MATHEW Advocate SR.No.37111