Karthik v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Karthik ..Petitioner Vs The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, T-16, Semmanchery Police Station, Chennai District.

Crime No.10 of 2026 ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No. 10 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner:

Mr.V.Vadivalagia Nambi For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 16.01.2026 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 125, 126(2), 296(b), 309(4), 311, 324(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.10 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner along with other accused persons allegedly waylaid the defacto

complainant during night hours, demanded money from him and when he refused, they abused him in filthy language, assaulted him and extorted a sum of Rs.2,700/- and a mobile phone at knife point.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and the allegations are baseless and exaggerated. It is further submitted that the petitioner is no way connected with the alleged occurrence and the respondent police have implicated the petitioner merely based on suspicion and without any legally admissible evidence. He would further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to comply with any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that there is no change in circumstances from the earlier dismissal of the bail application in Crl.O.P.No.6317 of 2026 dated 12.03.2026 and hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the submission of the learned counsel on either side and considering the earlier dismissal of the bail application in Crl.O.P.No.6317 of 2026 dated 12.03.2026 and there being no change in circumstances and also taking into account the nature of allegation that the petitioner has committed robbery at knife point, this Court is of the view that this is not an appropriate stage to consider the bail application. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 15-04-2026 NSL To

1. The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Sholinganallur.

2. Central Prison, Puzhal.

3. The Inspector of Police, T-16, Semmanchery Police Station, Chennai District.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 15-04-2026