Leela Vinodhan @ Vinodh v. The State Represented By Its,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 05.11.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA Leela Vinodhan @ Vinodh ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, H-4, Korukkupet Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.465 of 2024).

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS Act, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection with the Crime No.465 of 2024, on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Mohan Raj For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

This Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.10.2024, seeking bail in Crime No.465 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 126(2), 296(B), 308(5), 351(3) of BNS.

1/6

2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused has waylaid the de facto complainant, abused him in a filthy language and robbed a sum of Rs.200/- from at knife point and escaped in his auto. Hence the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 22.10.2024 and he is also ready to abide by any other stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner/accused has waylaid the de facto complainant and by intimidating him at knife point, robbed a sum of Rs.200/- from him. He further submitted that there is no previous case against the petitioner, however, he opposed for granting bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

2/6

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also taking note of the fact that there is no previous case against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the XV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, George Town, Chennai, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the 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, everyday at 06.30 p.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; 3/6

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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]; [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. 05.11.2024 ham 4/6

To

1. The XV Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Chennai.

2. The Inspector of Police, H-4, Korukkupet Police Station, Chennai.

3. The Central Prison, Puzhal - II, Chennai.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.,J.

ham 05.11.2024 6/6