Sathish Kumar @ Sathish @ Nei Sathish v. The State Rep. By Sub Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20-05-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL

1. Sathish Kumar @ Sathish @ Nei Sathish Petitioner/Accused Vs

1. The State Rep. By The Sub Inspector of Police J-4, Kotturpuram Police Station, Mylapore, Chennai.

Crime NO.65/2026 Respondent PRAYER:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 praying to grant bail to the petitioner in Crime No.65 of 2026 on the file of the respondent-police. For Petitioner :

Mr. Deepak Raj for Mr.K. Amirtharaj For Respondent :

Mr. L. Baskaran Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 18.05.2026 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying to grant bail.

2. The petitioner/Accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.02.2026 for the alleged offences punishable under Section under Section 115(2), 126(2), 296(b), 311, 351(3) of BNS in Crime No. 65 of 2026 on the file of the respondent-police.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 27.02.2026 at about 09.30, the petitioner has robbed a sum of Rs.1,550/- at a knife point from the defacto complainant and abused him with filthy language. Based on the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, the present complaint was lodged and the same has been registered.

4. Mr. Deepak Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He however submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He therefore prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Per contra, Mr. L. Baskaran, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-police submits that the petitioner robbed a sum of Rs.1,550/- at a knife point from the defacto complainant and abused him with filthy language. He further submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender who has 8 previous cases registered against him, including 4 cases of a similar nature. Hence, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) raised a strong objection to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused all the materials available on record.

7. The petitioner was arrested on 27.02.2026. The petitioner has permanent residence. Therefore, there is less possibility of absconding. Considering the same and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the offence alleged against the petitioner and taking note of the period of incarceration and with a view to give an opportunity to reform himself, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the IX Metropolitan

Magistrate, Saidapet.

(ii) 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 IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet. shall obtain a copy of any one of their identity proofs to ensure their identity. (iii) The petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent-police daily at 09.00 a.m. until further orders.

(iv) The petitioner shall furnish his residential address and mobile numbers to the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet. (v) The petitioner shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond to be executed under Chapter XXXV of BNSS, 2023. (vi) The petitioner shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (vii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or

tamper with the evidence.

(viii) The petitioner shall also not directly or indirectly, cause any threat to the defacto complainant, victims, and witnesses. (ix) The petitioner shall not enter into the defacto complainant's house or his work place.

(x) The petitioner shall not try to contact the defacto complainant, victims, and witnesses either directly or through any electronic mode. (xi) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet or Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions are imposed by them as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K. Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283].

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to the conditions stated supra.

20-05-2026 Pbl

R.SAKTHIVEL J.

To

1. The IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet 2.The Superintendent, Central Prison - II, Puzhal, Chennai. 3.The Sub Inspector of Police J-4, Kotturpuram Police Station, Mylapore, Chennai. 4.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court Madras.

CRL OP No. 13205 of 20-05-2026