S.Bharat Ram v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Samayapuram

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27/11/2025 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY S.Bharat Ram ... Petitioner/A10 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep., by, The Inspector of Police, Samayapuram Police Station, Trichy District, Crime No.427/2025.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : T.Leninkumar, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-33B.For Bail in Crime No.427/2025 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 09.10.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4) of BNS altered into Sections 61(2), 310(2) of BNS and Section 25(1A) of 1/4

the 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.Jewellery shop, Chennai. After delivering jewels at Coimbatore, while he was returning to Chennai in a car with another staff, the accused persons surrounded the car, broke the car window glass, threw chilli powder on their faces, and robbed approximately 10 kgms of gold ornaments from the defacto complainant and fled away in a Hyndai Car. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 09.10.2025. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that totally there are 12 accused in this cases. The main accused are A1 to A9 and they were arrested and detained under Act 14 of 1982. The petitioner is arrayed as A10 and the specific 2/4

overtact against the petitioner is he is the purchaser of the stolen gold ornaments. However, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of offence, and also considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties, out of which one surety should be a blood relative, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Trichy, and on further conditions that :- [a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

3/4

S.SRIMATHY,J.

PJL [c] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 is 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];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

27.11.2025 PJL TO

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.III, Trichy.

2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy.

3. The Inspector of Police, Samayapuram Police Station,Trichy District.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/4