Sanjay @ Pavada Sanjay v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.04.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN

1. Sanjay @ Pavada Sanjay S/o. Dhenna

2. Antony @ Anthonysamy S/o. Paulraj ... Petitioners / Accused 2 & 5 Vs.

The State represented by:

The Inspector of Police, P-1 Pulianthope Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.130 of 2025).

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioners on bail, in connection with the Crime No.130 of 2025, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr. A. Vinoth Kumar For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners/accused, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.03.2025, seeking bail in Crime No.130 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 191(3), 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 311 and 351(3) of BNS. 1/5

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners waylaid the defacto complainant and demanded money; that when the same was refused by the defacto complainant, the petitioners abused him in filthy language and attacked him using hands; and that committed robbery of Rs.850/- from the defacto complainant at knife point and threatened him of dire consequences. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are in custody from 23.03.2025; and that further custody is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioners .

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that, 1st petitioner/A2 has 2 other previous cases and the 2nd petitioner/A5 has 4 other previous cases and they are on bail, in those cases.

5. Considering the nature of allegations, period of incarceration, the petitioners are on bail in other previous cases and that since further custody is not 2/5

required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a separate bond each for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on 3/5

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)AIR SCW 5560];

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

21.04.2025 mjs To

1. The X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police, P-1 Pulianthope Police Station, Chennai.

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

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

4/5

SUNDER MOHAN., J.

mjs 21.04.2025 5/5