M. Srikanth vs State Rep By Inspector Of Police
2026 Latest Caselaw 2040 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2040 Mad
Judgement Date : 20 April, 2026

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

M. Srikanth vs State Rep By Inspector Of Police on 20 April, 2026

                                                                             CRL OP No. 9424 of 2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                  DATED: 20-04-2026
                                                       CORAM
                                   THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
                                                CRL OP No. 9424 of 2026
                M. Srikanth
                                                                                     ..Petitioner
                                                          Vs
                State represented by
                Inspector of Police
                Mamallpuram Police Station,
                Chengalpattu District.
                (Crime No.180/2022)                                                ..Respondent

                PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya
                Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the above
                said P.R.C.No.37 of 2023 pending on the file of the Principal District and
                Session Judge, Chengapattu.


                              For Petitioner:          Mr.D.Dhanasekar

                              For Respondent:          Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar,
                                                       Govt Advocate (Crl.Side)

                                                       ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

05.06.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 395 and 397 of Indian Penal

Code, 1860 in Crime No.180 of 2022 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 23.03.2022, the accused persons

intercepted the defacto complainant and robbed Rs.500/- and a mobile phone at

knife point and assaulted him. The petitioner failed to appear before the Court

and NBW on 09.11.2023 was issued and he was secured on 05.06.2025. Hence,

the case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner has been regularly appearing before the Court and only due to

unavoidable circumstances he could not appear on one occasion and NBW was

issued on 09.11.2023. It is further submitted that the petitioner has already been

granted bail in connected cases. The learned counsel would further submit that

the petitioner has been in incarceration since 05.06.2025. 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 was secured only after two years

pursuant to NBW issued on 09.11.2023 and that he has five previous cases. It is

further submitted that the committal proceedings are completed and the case is

ready for trial. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the

learned counsel on either side.

__________ Page2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides

and taking into account the long incarceration of the petitioner since 05.06.2025

and the fact that the committal proceedings are complete and the trial is yet to

commence, this Court is of the view that further incarceration of the petitioner is

not required. Further, considering that the petitioner has already been granted

bail in connected cases, this Court is inclined to grant 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

Principal District and Session Judge, Chengalpattu 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 Trial Court concerned daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders and no petition seeking relaxation of the above conditions shall be entertained within a period of ninety (90) days from the date of release of the petitioner.

__________ Page3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

[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.

20-04-2026

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: