Muneeshwaran @ Muneesh v. State Of Tamilnadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Muneeshwaran @ Muneesh ..Petitioner(s) Vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Velipalayam Police Station, Nagapattinam.

..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.217 of 2024 and trial is pending before JM-II, Nagapattinam Court as CC.No.295/2024 and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

M.V.R.Bharath For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who had earlier jumped bail, was issued a non-bailable warrant (NBW) on 30.04.2024 in Crime No.1004 of 2020. Based on this warrant, a First Information Report (FIR) was registered in Crime No.215 of 2024. Pursuant to the FIR, the petitioner was apprehended and remanded to

judicial custody on 14.06.2024. While being transported after his arrest, the petitioner attempted to escape, during which he abused and caused injuries to the Police officials. The Police personnel managed to overpower and secure him, following which a separate FIR was registered in Crime No.217 of 2024 under Sections 294(b), 323, 353, and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The case is currently pending trial in C.C.No.295 of 2024 before the Judicial Magistrate II, Nagapattinam. Since the petitioner subsequently failed to appear properly before the Court, another NBW was issued, which was executed on 26.02.2026.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though a non-bailable warrant had been issued against the petitioner, he has been falsely implicated and a concocted case was foisted upon him when he sought to surrender. He would further submit that the petitioner was suffering from spine disc dislocation and is undergoing treatment, and that he is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail.

3. The said contention was strongly opposed by the learned Government Counsel (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent, while opposing the grant of bail, reiterated the prosecution case and, on instructions, submitted that the

petitioner has a chronic history of absconding, and had even assaulted police personnel during his arrest, leading to a separate FIR. He further submitted that the petitioner is a history-sheeter with as many as 28 previous cases involving serious offences, some of which have resulted in convictions. He would contend that the trial in the present case has already reached an advanced stage of arguments, and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood of his absconding again and thereby disrupting the final disposal of the trial.

4. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

5. Considering the above facts and circumstances, the past conduct of the petitioner, the fact that he has 28 previous cases with a persistent history of nonappearance, the serious allegation of assaulting police officials during arrest, and the fact that the trial is already at the stage of final arguments, this Court is of the view that the mere grant of bail in an independent offence creates no vested right, and there is every likelihood of the petitioner absconding again if he is enlarged on bail. Therefore, in order to secure his presence and ensure the smooth completion of the trial, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 08-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Jeni To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Nagapattinam Court. 2.The Superintendent, Central Puzhal Prison-II, Chennai. 3.The Inspector of Police, Velipalayam Police Station, Nagapattinam. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

Jeni 08-06-2026