Settimani (Manimaran) v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.12.2025 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Settimani (Manimaran) ... Petitioner -VsState Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Karamadai Police Station, Coimbatore District.

(Crime No.214 of 2025) ... Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.214 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Murali For Respondent :

Mr.A.Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.05.2025, for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 331(3), 331(4) 1/5

and 305(a) of BNS Act, in Crime No.214 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner joined hands with other accused broke open the defacto complainant's house and committed theft of 19 1⁄2 sovereigns of gold jewels and 165 grams of silver articles. Hence, the complaint was lodged, and the petitioner was arrested and is in judicial custody.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case, since he has got some previous cases. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 27.05.2025 and 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. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are totally two accused in this case and the petitioner is ranked as A1. He further submitted that the petitioner hails from Telangana and has 14 previous cases, similar in nature 2/5

pending against him. He further submitted that only a portion of the stolen properties was recovered. However, he opposes to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, the fact that only a portion of the stolen properties was recovered, and that the petitioner has 14 previous cases of a similar nature pending against him, this Court is of the view that, if he is released on bail at this stage, the petitioner is likely to indulge in similar activities. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 02.12.2025 drl To 3/5

1.The Inspector of Police, Karamadai Police Station, Coimbatore District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

drl 4/5

02.12.2025 5/5