Pradeep v. The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08-09-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Pradeep S/o, Krishnamoorthy, No.40, Kannamman Kovil, Tiruvottiyur, Chennai -600 019.
Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police H-8, Thiruvottiyur police station, Chennai.
(Crime No.964 of 2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioner on bail in Connection with the crime No.964 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police For Petitioner(s):
Mr. D.Padmanabhan For Respondent(s):
Mr.A.Gopinath, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/6
ORDER
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 06.08.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 125, 324(1), 309(4), 311, 351(3) of BNS in Crime No.964 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of prosecution is that on 06.08.2025 around 08.00 hours, when the defacto complainant was a coolie and on his way to his routine work, the petitioner along with other accused came to him and used filthy words and assaulted him with hands and threatened with knife and robbed a sum of Rs.600/-. Hence, the complaint was registered against the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that the entire allegation is false, vindictive, wanton and he is no way connected with the offence. He would submit that he has not at all committed any of offence as alleged by the respondent police and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he will abide by any condition that may be imposed by this court. He would submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 33 days from 06.08.2025. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.
2/6
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent raised objections stating that as per the complaint, all the accused illegally came, waylaid the defacto complainant, scolded him and taken away a amount of Rs.600/-, thereby they have committed robbery. He would submit that there are five previous cases pending against him, out of which, two cases registered are similar in nature. He would submit that that if he is released on bail, he would tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation and the investigation is almost completed. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
5. Considering the above facts and circumstances and the fact that according to prosecution, the petitioner is also one of participant and having committed the offence of robbery and the fact that the investigation almost completed, co-accused was released on bail and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner for more than 33 days, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:
6. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) as non-refundable deposit to the credit of Madras High Court Advocates Clerks Welfare Association, High Court of Madras, Indian Bank, High Court Branch, S.B.A/c. No.484077244, IFSC.No.IDIB000M157, and on such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be 3/6
released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each, in which one surety must be a blood surety, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvottiyur, Chennai and on further conditions that: (a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar Card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity; (b) the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for period of three months; (c) the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature;
(d) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
(e) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;
(f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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)AIR SCW 5560]; 4/6
(g) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.
08-09-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rpp To
1. Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvottiyur, Chennai. 2.The Inspector of Police, H-8 Thiruvottiyur Police Station, Chennai.
3. The Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Puzhal-II, Chennai. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras 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.
5/6
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
rpp CRL OP No. 24410 of 08-09-2025 6/6