Navin.L v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Navin L ... Petitioner Vs.

State represented by The Inspector of Police, M-3 Puzhal Police Station, Chennai Crime No.150 of 2026 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in the above Cr.No.150 of 2026 on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Muthu Pandi For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 308(2) and 351(2) of BNS, in Crime No.150 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail. 1/5

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with other accused waylaid the defacto complainant and robbed a sum of Rs.1,000/- at knife point. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the stolen amount has been recovered. He further submitted that the co-accused were arrested and released on bail. He also submitted that the petitioner has no previous case.

5. Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances and the fact that the petitioner has no bad antecedents and further co-accused were arrested and released on bail and the stolen amount has been recovered and ,at this point of time, no custodial interrogation of the petitioner is 2/5

required. Hence this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Madhavaram, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;

(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required;

(d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate 3/5

actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

16.04.2026 sma To

1. District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Madhavaram. 2.The Inspector of Police, M-3 Puzhal Police Station, Chennai 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

4/5

C.KUMARAPPAN.J.

sma 16.04.2026 5/5