Prasanth @ Kattaiayan v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 05.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Prasanth @ Kattaiyan

...Petitioner/Accused 1

Vs.

State rep by The Inspector of Police, Sholavaram Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

(Crime No.41 of 2025) ...

Respondent PRAYER: This criminal original petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.41 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :

Mr.P.Chandrasekar For Respondent :

Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.01.2025, seeking bail in Page No.1 of 6

Crime No.41 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 296(b), 126(2), 125, 324(4), 309(4), 311, 351(3) of BNS, 2023. 2.It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner had waylaid the defacto complainant, abused him in filthy language, assaulted him and robbed Rs.470/- at knife point. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and the petitioner is in custody from 21.01.2025 and hence, further custody of the petitioner is not required. 4.Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are twenty eight previous cases against the petitioner, out of which four cases have been disposed and he is on bail in all the other cases.

5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

Page No.2 of 6

6.Considering the nature of allegations, period of incarceration and the fact that the petitioner is on bail in the other previous cases and since further custody of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of interrogation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate II, Ponneri, and on further conditions that: [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

Page No.3 of 6

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

05.03.2025 ata Page No.4 of 6

Copy to:

1.The Inspector of Police, Sholavaram Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

2.The Judicial Magistrate II, Ponneri.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

Page No.5 of 6

ata 05.03.2025 Page No.6 of 6