Karthick @ Bunk Karthick v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Subramaniapuram

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 12842 of 2026 Karthick @ Bunk Karthick

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Subramaniapuram Police Station, Madurai District.

(Crime No.2004 of 2010)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Balamuruganantham Advocate For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 2004 of 2010 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.03.2026, for the offences punishable under Section 147, 148, 326, 450, 307, 506(i), 120(b) of IPC, in P.R.C.No.54 of 2021, on the file of the 1/6

learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai, in Crime No.2004 of 2010 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner involved in attempt of murder the defacto complainant. In this case, the petitioner was arrested and released on bail. Subsequently, during the pendency of P.R.C.No.54 of 2021, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai, summons were sent to him. It was reported that since proper address was not furnished, summons were not served and Non Bailable Warrant was issued and surety action was also taken place. Thereafter, the Non Bailable Warrant was executed on 10.03.2026 and now the petitioner is in custody.

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 was not absconding and he was not served with the summons on the PRC stage and he was not aware of the issuance of NBW. He is in custody from 10.03.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. He is also ready to co-operate for the trial process. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

2/6

4. The learned Counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution case and reported that the petitioner has one previous case. In this case, he was absconded for more than 6 years. Hence, he prays to dismiss this application.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the order passed by the Sessions Court shows that no summon was served on the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has not furnished the proper address, it also reveals that the proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. was also taken against the petitioner, the bonds executed by the petitioner was also forfeited, only thereafter, the petitioner was arrested on NBW, though it is stated that the petitioner was absconding for more than 6 years, since the petitioner was not served with the summons during the PRC stage, this Court is of the view that he is entitled for bail and also considering the period of incarceration, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees 3/6

Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned III Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned III Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai, on all working days, 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 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 4/6

Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 51730]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(K R S J) 30.06.2026 TM To 1.The III Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, Subramaniapuram Police Station, Madurai District. (Crime No.2004 of 2010) 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12842 of 2026 Date : 30.06.2026 6/6