Pradeep v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP No. 32882 of 2025 1.Pradeep 2.Diwakar Petitioner(s)/A1 and A2 Vs The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Saravanampatti Police Station Coimbatore, Crime No. 480 of 2025.

Respondent(s) PRAYER : To enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No. 480 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.D.Padmanabhan For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/5

ORDER

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.09.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 309(6), 311 of BNS Act, in Crime No. 480 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that these petitioners joined hands with two other accused, while the de-facto complainant was sleeping his house, had trespassed into the house of the de-facto complainant and attacked him by using woodenlog and taken away gold jewels, silver articles, two mobile phones and other things. Further, they have forced the de-facto complainant to transfer a sum of Rs.6,900/- by way of UPI payment and thereafter, ran away. Based on the complaint, the petitioners were arrested on 15.08.2025.

3. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He also submits that the petitioners are ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays bail to the petitioners.

2/5

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the proclamation case and submits that totally four accused involved in this case and the stolen properties viz., 12 grams gold, 10 grams silver articles were recovered from the petitioner herein and some properties have not recovered from them. He also submits that the petitioner/A1 is having six previous cases and the petitioner/A2 is having three previous cases similar in nature. He further submits that A1 to A3 were arrested and remanded to judicial custody and A4 still absconding. He further submits that final report is not yet field. He opposed for grant of bail to the petitioners. 5.

Considering the fact that the petitioners have committed midnight robbery; that only a portion of the property has been recovered and some properties have not recovered from them; that the 1st petitioner is having six previous cases and the 2nd petitioner is having three previous cases; that if bail is granted to the petitioners, they would indulge similar offences in future, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 02.12.2025 3/5

Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order To 1.

The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Saravanampatti Police Station Coimbatore, Crime No. 480 of 2025.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 4/5

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

CRL OP No. 32882 of 2025 02.12.2025 5/5