Madras HC Grants Anticipatory Bail To Two Men Accused Of Illegally Transporting Gravel Sand, Subject To Each Depositing ₹7,500 With District Mineral Foundation Trust

The petitioners, Accused 1 and 2, sought anticipatory bail in Crime No. 546 of 2026, registered for alleged offences under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”) and Section 21(4) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.

The prosecution alleged that, at about 1:00 a.m. on 14 October 2026, the petitioners illegally transported three units of gravel sand from Nayakar Kanmai using a tipper lorry and JCB.

The petitioners denied the allegation and stated that, without prejudice to their rights, they were willing to deposit an amount imposed by the Court.

The State submitted that the petitioners had illegally transported the gravel sand.

The petition was brought under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), the provision invoked for anticipatory bail.

The alleged offences were under Section 303(2) BNS and Section 21(4) of the MMDR Act.

The Court also referred to Section 355 BNSS in permitting the petitioners’ counsel to file an absence petition if a petitioner could not attend court.

For breach of bail conditions, the Court relied on P.K. Shaji v. State of Kerala, [(2005) AIR SCW 5560], noting that the Magistrate or Trial Court could take appropriate action as if it had itself imposed the conditions and released the petitioners on bail.

Having considered the nature of the charges and the parties’ submissions, the Court concluded that anticipatory bail was appropriate, subject to conditions.

The petitioners’ stated willingness to deposit an amount was reflected in the direction that each deposit ₹7,500 with the District Mineral Foundation Trust, Theni District, without prejudice to their rights and contentions.

The Court also required execution of bonds and sureties, initial and periodic appearances before the Judicial Magistrate, and compliance with conditions against tampering with evidence or absconding.

Upon producing the deposit receipt or acknowledgment, the petitioners were ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest, or on appearance within fifteen days of receiving the order, on executing a bond of ₹25,000 each with two sureties for the like sum.

The order further imposed appearance, non-tampering, and non-absconding conditions, and prescribed procedures for interrogation and absence from court.