Ajay Pradeep v. State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17-03-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 6937 of 2026 Ajay Pradeep S/o. Prabhu, 48/22 Bungala Thottam, Thathagappati, Salem District -63600.
...Petitioner/Accused
Rank not known Vs State Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Karuppur Police Station, Salem City.
(Crime No.367 of 2025)
...Respondent/
Complainant Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS Act to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest pending investigation in Crime No.367 of 2025 on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner :
Mr.T.Muruganantham For Respondent:
Mr.P.Dhileepan
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 318(2), 319(2), 308(4), and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, corresponding offences under Sections 417, 419, 387 and 506 of IPC in Crime No.367 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with other accused, robbed cash from the de-facto complainant as part of a child adoption racket. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the de facto complainant, and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would also submit that the petitioner is not a named accused and he was implicated only based upon the confession statement of the co-accused and that though the occurrence took place on 11.11.2025, an FIR was registered later, on 17.11.2025. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and he is ready to cooperate with the investigation. 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's case and, upon instructions, submitted that no previous cases have been registered against the petitioner and that the other accused have already been arrested and released on bail. However, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard the submission made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), this petitioner has no previous cases, and the other accused have already been arrested and released on bail. At this length of time, the question of custodial interrogation of the petitioner does not arise. In such a view of the position and also taking into consideration the nature of the allegation against the petitioner and considering the fact that the petitioner was subsequently implicated based upon the confession statement, and upon the fact that the occurrence took place on 11.11.2025, this Court is inclined to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, subject to certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Salem, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;
(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;
(c) The petitioner shall sign before the respondent police twice a day at 10.30 a.m., and 5.30 p.m., until further orders;
(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];
(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.
17-03-2026 dk Copy to
1. The Judicial Magistrate No.2, Salem.
2. The Inspector of police Karuppur Police Station, Salem city.
3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
dk CRL OP No. 6937 of 2026 17-03-2026