Karthick v. State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Karthick ..Petitioner Vs The State, represented by the Inspector of Police, Pullarambakkam Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

Crime No.77 of 2026 ..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.77 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner:

Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent:

Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.06.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act, 1959, Section 7(1)(a) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, read with Sections 132 and 296(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.77 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 06.06.2026 at about 1:00 PM, while the police party was on surveillance near the Chinna Ikkadu Main Road, the petitioner, along with the other accused was standing by the roadside, allegedly in possession of deadly weapons and causing a public nuisance. Upon the police intervening and warning them, the petitioner allegedly abused the police and attempted to assault them. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner has three previous cases registered against him, out of which one is for dacoity and two are similar in nature. Hence, he strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the serious nature of the allegations against the petitioner, and also taking into account the fact that the petitioner has three previous cases registered against him, out of which one is for dacoity and two are similar in nature, this Court is of the firm view that it is not desirable to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 25-06-2026 NSL To

1. The Inspector of Police, Pullarambakkam Police Station, Tiruvallur District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 25-06-2026