Karthik @ Stephen v. State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.12.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Crl.O.P.No.35341 of 2025 1.Karthick @ Stephen 2.Karthick ... Petitioners Vs.
The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, M-3 Puzhal Police Station, Tiruvallur District (Crime No. 986 of 2025).
... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.986 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinothkumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
O R D E R
The petitioners were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.11.2025, for the alleged offence punishable under Section 123 of BNS, in Crime No.986 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek bail. 1/6
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.10.2025, the petitioner, along with other accused, forcibly administered a Tydol tablet to the defacto complainant by injection, causing severe pain and injection, for which he was hospitalized. Totally 250 Tydol tablets were recovered from the accused. Hence, the complaint.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are falsely implicated in this case, since they got some previous cases. He further submitted that no banned tablet was recovered from the possession of the petitioners and all the contrabands were seized from the other accused. He further submitted that based on the confession of the arrested accused, this petitioner was added as an accused. He further submitted that the petitioners are in judicial custody from 04.11.2025. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that totally 250 Tydol tablets were recovered from the accused. He further submitted that the first petitioner is having 6 previous cases and the second petitioner is having four previous cases, pending against them. Hence, he opposed to 2/6
grant bail to the petitioners.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.
6. Considering the rival submissions of the learned counsel on either side, based on the confession statement of the arrested accused, the petitioners were arrayed as accused and already the main accused were secured by the police and no contraband was recovered from these petitioners, and though the petitioners have some previous cases, in all the cases, they have been released on bail, and also considering the period of their incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners, subject to certain conditions.
[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Madhavaram, and on further conditions that:- 3/6
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of one month.
[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;
[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;
[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 BNS.
26.12.2025 drl 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.
To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Madhavaram.
2.The Inspector of Police, M-3 Puzhal Police Station, Tiruvallur District 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison-II, Puzhal, Chennai.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
P.DHANABAL, J.
5/6
drl Crl.O.P.No.35341 of 2025 26.12.2025 6/6