Ramesh v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Ramesh S/o. Munikrishnan, Arunthathipuram, Athikathur, Kadambathur Village and Post, Thiruvallur District - 631 203.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State represented by:

The Inspector of Police, Thiruvelangadu Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

Cr.No.181 of 2025.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER: The Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.181/2025 pending on the file of respondent.

For Petitioner(s):

M/S.K.Balachandar For Respondent(s):

Mr. S. Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Criminal side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.12.2025 for the alleged offences under Section 126(2), 118(1), 303(2) and 310 of B.N.S. in Crime No.181 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that both the defacto complainant and the petitioner were doing pawn broking business and while sharing the profits among them, there was dispute arose between them, due to which, on 15.06.2025 at about 2 p.m., the petitioner along with 4 other accused waylaid the defacto complainant, assaulted him with knife and snatched Rs.2,75,000/- from him at knife point and caused injury to the defacto complainant. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is doing pawn broking business and the defacto complainant is his partner and there was a dispute in respect of sharing of profits and hence wordy quarrel took place and in furtherance of which, the defacto complainant gave a false complaint against this petitioner. He would further submit that the coaccused / A2 has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order passed in Crl. O.P. No.5374 of 2026 dated 03.03.2026. Hence, he prays that taking into consideration the period of incarceration of the petitioner since 19.12.2025, he may be enlarged on bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case. Though the learned Government Advocate strongly opposed to bail application, he fairly submits that the co-accused was already granted bail vide order in Crl.O.P. No.5374 of 2026 dated 03.03.2026.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side), it is seen that the petitioner has been under incarceration from 19.12.2025 and the co-accused/ A2 was already enlarged on bail. Therefore, the on the claim raised by the petitioner for parity, he may be enlarged on bail.

7. In such view of the above reasons, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following stringent conditions:

8. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tiruttani, Tiruvallur District and on further conditions that: [a] 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily twice at 10.30 a.m. and 5.30 p.m. for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required by the respondent police for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283]:

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

10-03-2026 MJS Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. The Judicial Magistrate, Tiruttani, Tiruvallur District.

2. The Inspector of Police,Thiruvelangadu Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Central Prison-II, Puzhal, Chennai.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MJS 10-03-2026