Akilan @ Joshuva v. State By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Akilan @ Joshuva ..Petitioner(s) Vs State by, Inspector of Police, M-3, Puzhal Police Station, Cr.No.1142/2025.

..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.1142 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Puzhal Police Station.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.A.Murugananthan For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.12.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 126(2), 309(4), 311, 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.1142 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with other accused assaulted the de facto complainant using a knife and robbed a

sum of Rs.2,100/- from him. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that the petitioner has been under incarceration since 19.12.2025. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submits that there are about seven previous cases pending against the petitioner. He further submits that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may abscond and commit similar offences in future as well. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. From the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the petitioner has seven previous cases pending against him. From the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, though the petitioner is under incarceration since 19.12.2026, enlargement of bail to the petitioner would jeopardise the prosecution case and may have a

negative impact on society at large. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. In view of the above, this Court does not find any merit in the present bail application. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. 16-03-2026 rap To

1. The Inspector of Police, M-3, Puzhal Police Station.

2. The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Madhavaram.

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

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

rap 16-03-2026