Shyam Robert v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.03.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Shyam Robert ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Tiruvallur Town Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

Crime.No.22 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023 to enlarge the petitioner on bail, concerned in Crime No.22 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Tiruvallur Town Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.01.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 127(2), 191(2), 296(b), 310(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.22 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with the other accused have waylaid the de facto complainant and demanded money and

robbed a sum of Rs.600/- at knife point. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is no way connected to this case and has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that he is under incarceration from 10.01.2026 and that he has got a five years old child. Hence, his presence is very much required. Therefore, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submits that the petitioner has 12 previous cases registered against him and 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 also perused the records available. 6.From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the petitioner has got 12 previous cases of similar nature, which clearly demonstrates that whenever he was granted bail by the Courts, he has misused the liberty granted to him. In view of the same, if the

petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may be emboldened to indulge in similar offences in future without fear of law. Hence, taking into consideration of interest of the society at large, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7.Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 23.03.2026 rap To

1. The Inspector of Police, Tiruvallur Town Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruvallur.

4. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

rap 23.03.2026