Yogesh Barade @ Yogesh Tukaram Barade v. State By, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09-02-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Yogesh Barade @ Yogesh Tukaram Barade ..Petitioner(s) Vs State By The Sub Inspector of Police C-2, Elephant Gate Police Station, Chennai Crime No.248 of 2024 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: This petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in Crime No.248 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police and pass orders.

For Petitioner(s):

V. Vasanth For Respondent(s):

Ms. J.R. Archana Govt Advocate ( Crl Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 306 of BNS in Crime No.248 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/A3 had committed theft of 3.600 grams of gold from JDS Gold Testing Company. It is alleged that the petitioners are native of Maharashtra. Based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, who is the manager of JDS Gold Testing company, the case came to be registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that A1 and A2 are the main accused in this case and they have been arrested and released on bail. He further submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. However, the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation and abide by any other stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. 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 submitted that the petitioner is still absconding and the stolen property is not yet recovered. He further submitted that on enquiry it is found that the stolen jewels are with this petitioner and investigation in this case is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made by both sides and the property is not recovered and investigation in this case is not yet completed, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this Criminal original petition is dismissed.

09-02-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SMN

To

1. The Sub Inspector of Police C-2, Elephant Gate Police Station, Chennai

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

smn 09-02-2026