Karthik v. The State Rep. By, Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.06.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Karthik ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police P4 Basin Bridge Police Station Crime No.222 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Crime No.222 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Mukesh Kannah For Respondent :

Mr.L.Baskaran Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.04.2025, for the offences punishable under Section 103(1) & 118(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No.222 of 2025, 1/6

registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on the date of occurrence, due to family dispute, the petitioner stabbed his father with knife on his chest and shoulder, as a result of which, he sustained grievous injuries and later, he died in the hospital. Hence the case.

3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is none other than the son of the deceased and due to family dispute, the petitioner attacked his father with knife and due to excessive bleeding, he died and there is no criminal intention or motive. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is suffering incarceration from 22.04.2025 and he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner is none other than the son of the deceased and there was a wordy quarrel between the father and son; due to sudden provocation, the petitioner stabbed his father with vegetable knife on his 2/6

chest and shoulder and later, he died in the hospital. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submissions made by the learned counsels on either side and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai-8, and on further conditions that: [a] 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 the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

3/6

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for further interrogation. [c] the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; [d] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses; [e] the petitioner 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; [f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on 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)13 SCC 283];

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

17.06.2025 uma 4/6

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 the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

To

1. The X Metropolitan Magistrate Egmore, Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police P4 Basin Bridge Police Station

3. The Central Prison, Puzhal-II

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

uma 17.06.2025 6/6