No blanket bar to grant anticipatory bail in cases of illegal quarrying, smuggling of sand and minerals

Background

• Under Section 438 of CrPC (Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest), a petition was filed before Madras High Court seeking anticipatory bail in a case involving quarrying/mining, theft, smuggling of sand and minerals.

• The court took serious view of increase in such illegal activities and passed a common order for a batch of 36 petitions relating to these offences while observing that, "this court can see that due to the amount of money involved, the business of illegal quarrying/mining, theft, and sand smuggling activities is increasing day by day and offenders are bold enough to involve in the offences with a fond belief that they will be able to get advance bail by accepting and undertaking to comply with any stringent conditions imposed by the courts. Orders of the court are routinely taken more lightly, and the industry is thriving be engaging men and materials on a large scale."

• Justice AD Jagdish Chandira also noted that, "Each day at least 10 to 15 cases are being listed seeking the relief of anticipatory bail in offences of illegal quarrying/mining, theft and smuggling of sand and minerals. Despite the offences being non-bailable and this Court imposing stringent conditions, the police are not able to abate the menace of illicit quarrying/mining, theft and smuggling of sand and minerals."

• The court while dismissing these 36 petitions together observed that, "the discretionary powers has been consciously and continuously misused by the offenders and the enforcers as well in an organized manner and this court is of the firm opinion that the discretionary powers cannot be extended to persons indulging in illegal sand mining, smuggling, and theft of sand and minerals."

Supreme Court's order

• A Special Leave Petition was filed before the Supreme Court with regard to the aforesaid matter.

• A 3-judge bench headed by Justice S. K. Kaul and comprising of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Hrishikesh Roy observed that, "in consideration of anticipatory bail the role assigned to a person would have to be considered."

• TThe Supreme Court clarified that a blanket restriction cannot be placed on anticipatory bail in cases of illegal quarrying/mining, theft and smuggling of sand and minerals and dismissed the SLP stating that, "We may not agree with the broad sweep of the observations in para 27 of the relied upon judgment in the impugned order, i.e, Bala @ Balasubramani vs.State in Crl.OP No. 13334 of 2020 and connected matters, decided on 03.09.2020."

What are your views on the Court’s order? Let us know in the comment section below.