C. Imayan @ Chinna v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 01-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN C.Imayan @ Chinna ..Petitioner(s) Vs State represented by The Inspector of Police Kadambathur Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

Crime No. 58/2026.

..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.58/2026 on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.P.Anbarasan For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.03.2026 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 132 and 310(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, read with Section 25(1)(a) of Arms Act, 1959, in Crime No.58 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, on the day of the occurrence, while the respondent police were on patrol duty near Sridevikuppam, Venmanambudur, and Senjipanambakkam, they found the petitioner threatening the public with a knife near the Senjipanambakkam railway station with the intent to commit robbery. The respondent police subsequently registered a suo motu complaint against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the allegations are false and that no injuries were caused to any person. It was further contended that the petitioner has been in custody since 05.03.2026, his further detention is not required, and that the case against him is fabricated and prayed for the grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The said contentions were strongly opposed by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent, who submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 05.03.2026 and has two previous cases pending against him. It was further submitted that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is a strong possibility of him tampering with witnesses or absconding.

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

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) regarding the petitioner's conduct, specifically the allegation of committing robbery at a railway station using a knife and threatening the public and the fact that he has two previous cases pending against him, this Court is of the view that it would not be appropriate to grant bail at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 01-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Jeni To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Thiruvallur. 2.The Superintendent, Central Prison II, Puzhal, Chennai. 3.The Inspector of Police, Kadambathur Police Station, Thiruvallur District. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

Jeni 01-04-2026