Vinothkumar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30/04/2025 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SAKTHIVEL Vinothkumar ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, South Police Station, Thoothukudi District.

(Crime No. 114 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.A.Arun Ramnath, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No. 114 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-police. 1/4

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner on 28.04.2025 under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, praying to grant bail.

2. The petitioner / Sole Accused was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 18.02.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 25(1A) of the Arms Act in Crime No.114 of 2025 on the file of the respondent-Police.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 17.02.2025, while the petitioner went to carry out gardening work in the Judges' quarters, at that time, he took a photograph of himself sitting on a Judge's car while holding an aruval. Hence, the complaint.

4. Mr.A.Arun Ramnath, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he did not commit any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He however submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions to be imposed by this Court. He further submits that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 18.02.2025. He 2/4

therefore prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Per contra, Mr.K.Sanjai Gandhi, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent-police, submits that the petitioner was found in illegal possession of aruval by sitting on a Judge's car in the Judges Quarters. He further submits that there are four previous cases pending against the petitioner. Hence, he vehemently opposes to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records.

7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that if bail is granted to the petitioner, he may commit the similar offence again and may cause nuisance to the judicial officers. Considering the same and also considering the previous bad antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

3/4

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. sd/- 30/04/2025 / TRUE COPY / /05/2025 Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

TSG TO 1.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SOUTH POLICE STATION, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.

2.THE OFFICER INCHARGE , PERURANI SUB JAIL, THOOTHUKUDI.

3.THE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8110 of 2025 Date :30/04/2025 VN/27.05.2025 /4P/4C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023 4/4