Venkatesan @ Kullan vs State Rep. By
2026 Latest Caselaw 2240 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2240 Mad
Judgement Date : 29 April, 2026

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Venkatesan @ Kullan vs State Rep. By on 29 April, 2026

Author: A.D.Jagadish Chandira

Bench: A.D.Jagadish Chandira

                                                                                   Crl.O.P.No.10549 of 2026

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED: 29.04.2026

                                                       CORAM

                           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

                                               Crl.O.P.No.10549 of 2026

              Venkatesan @ Kullan                                               ... Petitioner
                                                            Vs.
              The State represented by,
              The Inspector of Police,
              Arcot Taluk Police Station,
              Ranipet District.
              (Crime No.20 of 2026).                                            ... Respondent

              PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya
              Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection
              with Crime No.20 of 2026, pending investigation on the file of the respondent
              police.


                                     For Petitioner     :    Mr.D.Thirumoorthy
                                     For Respondent     :    Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar
                                                             Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

                                                      ORDER

Petition seeking bail in respect of Crime No.20 of 2026 registered for the

offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 232(1) and 351(2) of BNS, is on board

for consideration.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, pleading innocence on the

part of the petitioner, who has been in incarceration since 27.01.2026 and false

implication in the case, seeks indulgence of this Court. He also submits that the

petitioner and the de facto complainant are known to each other and due to some

misunderstanding, a false complaint has been lodged. He further submits that the

petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this

court.

3. The case of the prosecution as put forth by the learned Government

Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the

grant of bail, is that the petitioner, who is an accused in a case involving the

POCSO Act lodged by the de facto complainant in Crime No.110 of 2025, abused

and intimidated the de facto complainant to withdraw the said case. He further

submits that the case in Crime No.110 of 2025 has been taken on the file of the

learned Principal Sessions Court, Ranipet, in Spl.S.C.No.177 of 2025. He further

submits that the investigation in this case has almost been completed and this is

the second application for bail filed by the petitioner before this Court.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned

Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent police and perused the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

materials available on record and considering the period of incarceration

undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner

with certain conditions and accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on

bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand

only) with two sureties, each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the learned

District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Arcot, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, everyday at 06.30 p.m., until further orders;

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

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness 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 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];

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

29.04.2026

ham

Note:

1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order on the Official Website of this Court.

2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded on Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order, when uploaded on the official website of this Court, will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

1. The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Arcot.

2. The Inspector of Police, Arcot Taluk Police Station, Ranipet District.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.,J.

ham

29.04.2026

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis