Karthick @ Aba Karthick v. State Rep By. The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14-05-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR
1. Karthick @ ABA Karthick 1st Mani road, Madhavaram, Puzhal, Chennai District and 3 Others.
2. Ragul 1st Mani road, Madhavaram, Puzhal, Chennai District.
3. Vasanth 1st Mani road, Madhavaram, Puzhal, Chennai District.
4. Gokulraj 1st Mani road, Madhavaram, Puzhal, Chennai District.
Petitioner(s) Vs
1. State Rep by. The Inspector of Police Madhavaram Police Station, Chennai District, Crime No.194 of 2025 1/8
Respondent(s) PRAYER This Criminal Original Petition is filed to enlarge the petitioner on bail concerned in Crime No.194 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Madhavaram Police station, Chennai District on such terms and Conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case For Petitioner(s):
Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent:
Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
Petition seeking bail in respect of Crime No.194 of 2025 registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 309(4), 311, 125, 324(4), 351(3) of BNS is on board for consideration. 2.
The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners on 18.04.2025 at about 11.00 a.m., waylaid the defacto complainant and demanded money but the defacto complainant refused. Thereafter, the petitioners abused him in filthy language and tried to assault him at knife point and threatened with dire consequences. Hence, the case.
2/8
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons, they have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution; that the petitioners have been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.04.2025. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to co-operate for the investigation and prayed for bail to the petitioners. 4.
The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioners are regular offenders and stated that the first petitioner have four previous cases, the third and fourth petitioners have two previous cases and the second petitioner has no bad antecedents and opposed for grant of bail to the petitioners. 5.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, 3/8
the nature of allegation against the petitioners, the submissions made by the learned counsels on either side and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail with the following conditions:
(1) The petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Madhavaram.
(2) The petitioners shall report before the respondent police everyday at 10:30 a.m., for a period of thirty day.
(3) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity;
(4) The petitioners shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;
4/8
(5) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the defacto complainant and witnesses;
(6) The petitioners to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;
(7) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions are imposed by themselves as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283].
(8) If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.
14.05.2025 jai 5/8
Note:-
1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the official website of this Court.
2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in official website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.
6/8
To 1.State Rep by. The Inspector of Police Madhavaram Police Station, Chennai District, Crime No.194 of 2025.
2. The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Madhavaram.
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison-II, Puzhal, Chennai.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
7/8
M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.
jai CRL OP No. 15118 of 14-05-2025 8/8