Hanumanram v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Samayapuram
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 22/04/2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Hanumanram ... Petitioner/Accused No.4 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Samayapuram Police Station, Trichy District, Crime No.427/2025. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.427/2025 on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner : D.Rajaboopathy, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan, Additional Public Prosecutor ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to 1/6
judicial custody on 23.09.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4) of BNS @ 3(5), 61(2), 310(2) of BNS and 25(1B)(a) of Arms Act in Crime No.427 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is an employee of R.K.Silver Jewel shop at Chennai. On 13.09.2025 at about 08.20 p.m, after selling the gold jewels in their regular shops in various districts, the complainant was returned to Chennai in a car and the car was driven by the petitioner herein. At that time, the car was stopped by four persons near SRM College, Trichy to Chennai National Highway Road and they rounded the car and broken the glass and spread over the chilly powder and robbed 10 kg of jewels. Hence, this case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner's name was not found in the FIR and the co-accused were released on bail and he has been arrested and 2/6
remanded to judicial custody on 23.09.2025. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the accused are said to have waylaid the car of the defacto complainant and robbed 10 kg of jewels. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that the investigation was completed and charge sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Tiruchirapalli, and the same was taken on file in S.C.No.9 of 2026 and the case was posted for framing charges.
5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and the petitioner is not a named accused in the FIR and the co-accused were released on bail and the investigation was completed and charge sheet was filed before the 3/6
concerned Court and the same was taken on file in S.C.No.9 of 2026 and it was posted for framing charges and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Tiruchirapalli, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the trial Court on all working days at 10.30 a.m., until further orders. [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted 4/6
with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her 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 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].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.
(P D B J) 22.04.2026 dss P. DHANABAL,J DSS 5/6
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Tiruchirapalli, 2.The Inspector of Police, Samayapuram Police Station, Trichy District,
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Tiruchirapalli.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.7873 of 2026 Date : 22/04/2026 6/6