Balamurugan v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Balamurugan ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Krishnagiri Taluk Police Station, Krishnagiri.

Crime No.405 of 2018 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with C.C.No.147 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Krishnagiri.

For Petitioner :

Mr.A.Sivapandi For Respondent :

Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/4

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.02.2025, pursuant to a Non-Bailable Warrant issued in C.C.No.147 of 2018 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Krishnagiri, in Crime No.405 of 2018 for the offence punishable under Section 392 of IPC, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to non-appearance before the Trial Court on 13.02.2020, NBW was issued against the petitioner on 13.02.2020 and the same was executed on 07.03.2025. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 18.02.2025, pursuant to the execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant. He further submitted that since A2 in this case is still absconding, the trial has not progressed. The petitioner is ready to abide any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail.

2/4

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that already this Court dismissed the petitioner's bail applications in Crl.O.P.Nos.20968 & 25548 of 2025 dated 28.07.2025 and 17.09.2025 respectively. He further submitted that the petitioner has 25 previous cases. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the fact that the earlier bail applications filed by the petitioner were dismissed by this Court on merits, and taking into account the bad antecedents of the petitioner as well as the fact that this is the third bail petition with no change in circumstances, this Court is not inclined to reconsider the same.

7. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 27.10.2025 cda 3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

cda To 1.The Inspector of Police, Krishnagiri Taluk Police Station, Krishnagiri.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

27.10.2025 4/4