/9837/2026 of Ezhumalai Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police

CRL OP No.9837 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 9837 of 2026 Ezhumalai S/o.Velu, No.4/36, old colony, Mariyamman Kovil Street, Devanur, Viluppuram - 605752. ...Petitioner Vs The State Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Arakandanallur Police Station, Villupuram – 605 752. (Cr.No.19/2026) ...Respondent Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge on bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest in C r.No.19 of 2026 pending on the file of respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.Sri Krishna B K For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioner/A5, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 303(2) and 326(a) of BNS, in Crime No.19 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No.9837 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 2. The allegation against the petitioner/A5 is that the petitioner was found in illegal possession of 9 units of river sand without any valid licenc e or permit. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petiti oner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution, and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent c ondition that may be imposed by this Court and he is ready to cooperate for the investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that two previous cases have been registered against the petitioner. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No.9837 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent would submit that there are about fourteen accused, and this petitioner is A5. He would further submit that the petitioner has got two previous cases, whi ch clearly demonstrates that the petitioner has misused the liberty gr anted by this Court, and the quantity of river sand involved is also huge. Hence, this Court is of the firm view that the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 20-04-2026 dk 1. The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvennainallur. 2. The Inspector of Police, Arakandanallur Police Station, Villupuram – 605 752. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No.9837 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. dk CRL OP No. 9837 of 2026 20-04-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis