CRL OP No. 6998 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 6998 of 2026 Lavanya ..Petitioner Vs State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police Thally Police Station, Krishnagiri District. Cr.No.63/2026. ..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 483 of BNS Act to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.63 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent/ Police and thus rener justice. CRL OP No. 6998 of 2026 For Petitioner: Mr.M.P.Saravanan For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Order The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 07.03.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 5 and 6 of Explosive Substance Act in Crime No.63 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 6998 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused attempted to blast a huge rock by using explosive substance for treasure hunting. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even according to the FIR, no blast had taken place, only based on the attempt, FIR has been registered and the petitioner had been remanded to judicial custody. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner. 4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that based upon the rumour of some treasure, the petitioner has arranged for blasting the rock and there was a huge recovery from the petitioner along with other persons, namely 43 pieces of electric detonator, 25 pieces of Nitrate mixer and other drilling materials from the possession of the petitioner. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner. 5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 6998 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 6. From the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and considering the huge recovery of explosives and the fact that investigation is still pending, this Court is of a firm view that it is not appropriate to enlarge the petitioner at this stage. This Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 18-03-2026 SHL To: 1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Denkanikottai. 2. The Inspector of Police, Thally Police Station, Krishnagiri District. 3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 6998 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 C.KUMARAPPAN J. SHL CRL OP No. 6998 of 2026 18-03-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis