Karuppu @ Karuppasamy v. Home, Prohibition And Excise Department

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Karuppu @ Karuppasamy ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Sholavaram Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner Accused on bail in SC.No.578 of 2024 on the file of IV Additional District Judge, Thiruvallur at Ponneri in Crime No.521 of 2017 on the file of the Respondent.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.V.Sukumar For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.04.2024 following the execution of a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) issued during the Committal (PRC) stage for alleged offences punishable under

Sections 120(b), 147, 148, 450, and 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, seeks bail. This is the second bail application filed by the petitioner before this Court.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner during the Committal stage in P.R.C.No.26 of 2019, the petitioner absconded from Court proceedings. Consequently, the learned Magistrate issued a Non-Bailable Warrant against him on 02.03.2020, which was eventually executed after a prolonged period on 29.04.2024. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the sole breadwinner of his family and works as a selfemployed individual. The learned counsel submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances and lack of proper communication, the petitioner was unable to attend the Court proceedings, which led to the issuance of the NBW in P.R.C. No.26 of 2019 on 02.03.2020. Asserting that the petitioner has been in continuous judicial custody since 29.04.2024 and is willing to abide by any stringent conditions imposed, the counsel prayed for the grant of bail.

4. The said contention was strongly opposed by the learned Government Counsel (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent. He submitted that the petitioner is a history-sheeter classified under the 'A+' category in HS No.60 of 2020. He further contended that the petitioner is a habitual offender with 13 criminal cases pending against him. The learned Government Counsel emphasized that the petitioner deliberately absconded for over four years to evade trial, and if he is released on bail at this stage, there is an imminent threat of abscondance, tampering with vital prosecution witnesses, and an extreme threat to public safety.

5. Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, the gravity of the offence under Section 302 IPC, and the conduct of the petitioner, this Court finds no merit in the current application. The record reveals that the petitioner willfully absconded for more than four years during the vital committal stage, completely stalling the legal process. Furthermore, the petitioner's criminal profile as an 'A+' category history-sheeter with 13 pending criminal cases makes a high risk to society with an established threat of recidivism. Since his past conduct of jumping bail and evading an NBW from 2020 to 2024, there is an apprehension that he will abscond again and derail the upcoming trial. Consequently, this Court is of the firm view that it is not desirable to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this juncture.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 10-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Jeni To 1.The IV Additional District Judge, Thiruvallur at Ponneri. 2.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai. 3.The Inspector of Police, Sholavaram Police Station, Tiruvallur District. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

Jeni 10-06-2026