[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Ravi vs The State Rep.By, on 15 April, 2026
CRL OP No. 8890 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
CRL OP No. 8890 of 2026
Ravi
..Petitioner
Vs
The State
represented by the,
The Sub-Inspector of Police,
D3, Ice House Police Station,
Chennai. Crime No.46 of 2026.
..Respondent
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending
investigation in the Crime No.46 of 2025 on the file of the Inspector of Police,
D3 Ice House Police Station, Chennai.
For Petitioner: Mr.R. Shriharan
For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on
18.02.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 304(2) r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.46 of 2026 on the file of the respondent
police, seeks bail.
__________
Page1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 17.02.2026 at about 12.00 p.m.,
the defacto complainant parked his auto and while standing nearby, the
petitioner along with other accused snatched his mobile phone and fled away.
Hence, the case was registered.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and he has
nothing to do with the alleged occurrence. It is further submitted that the
petitioner has no previous bad antecedents and he is a permanent resident and he
will not abscond. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner
has been in incarceration since 18.02.2026 and the petitioner is ready to abide
by any conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to
the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the
respondent submitted that the petitioner is involved in two offences on the same
day, one relating to attempt to snatch chain and another relating to snatching of
mobile phone. However, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) fairly
submitted that the stolen property has already been recovered. It is also
submitted that there are no previous cases against the petitioner and
investigation is also completed. However, he opposed to grant bail to the
petitioner.
__________
Page2 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the
learned counsel on either side.
6. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on either
side, this Court is of the view that though the petitioner is involved in two
offences committed on the same day, the stolen property has already been
recovered. Further there are no previous cases against the petitioner and he has
been in incarceration since 18.02.2026. Taking into account the totality of the
circumstances and the fact that the investigation is now complete, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his
executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand
only), with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned II
Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and subject to the following
conditions:
[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left
Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship
[Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of
Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy
of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent
police twice a day at 10.30 a.m. and 05.30 p.m. for a
__________
Page3 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
period of two month and thereafter as and when required
for interrogation;
[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during
investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or
witness either during investigation or trial;
[e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the
learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate
action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the
conditions had been imposed and the petitioners released on
bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of
Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];
[f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be
registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
15-04-2026
NSL
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.
__________
Page4 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1. II Metropolitan Magistrate at Egmore, Chennai.
2. Central Prison Puzhal -II, Chennai.
3. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
D3, Ice House Police Station,
Chennai.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
__________
Page5 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
NSL
15-04-2026
__________
Page6 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
