Rajamani vs The State Represented By The Inspector ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2348 Mad

Madras High Court

Rajamani vs The State Represented By The Inspector ... on 6 May, 2026

                                                                              CRL OP No. 11030 of 2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                   DATED: 06-05-2026
                                                         CORAM
                                  THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
                                                 CRL OP No. 11030 of 2026
                1. Rajamani
                2. Gunaselvam
                3. Kumar
                4. Kasi

                                                                                      ..Petitioner(s)
                                                            Vs
                The State represented by
                The Inspector of Police
                Kilpennathur Police station,
                Thiruvannamalai District.
                (Crime No. 15 of 2026)
                                                                                     ..Respondent(s)

                PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of
                BNSS to enlarge the petitioners on bail in Crime No.15 of 2026 on the file of
                the respondent Police.


                              For Petitioners:           Mr.J. Mathi

                              For Respondent:            Mr.V.J.Priyadarsana
                                                         Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)


                                                         ORDER

Petition seeking bail in respect of Crime No.15 of 2026 registered for the

alleged offences punishable under Sections 331(4) and 305(a) of BNS, is on

board for consideration.

__________ Page1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners had committed theft

of batteries from the cell phone tower worth about Rs.65,000/-. Hence the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the

petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this

case. He also submitted that the petitioners are in no way connected with the

alleged offence, however, they are suffering incarceration from 27.02.2026. He

further submitted that the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent

condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail

to the petitioners.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the

respondent police, while opposing for grant of bail to the petitioners, reiterated

the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioners are habitual offenders,

against whom, 13 previous cases are pending.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of

allegations, submissions made by the learned counsels on either side and the

period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, this Court is inclined to

grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.

__________ Page2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

7. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on them

executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand

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

learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kilpennathur,

Thiruvannamalai District 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 petitioners shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of one month and thereafter, as and when required for further interrogation; [c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioners 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 petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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 of B.N.S.

06.05.2026 vkr/ham

__________ Page3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

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.

To

1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kilpennathur, Thiruvannamalai District.

2. The Inspector of Police, Kilpennathur Police station, Thiruvannamalai District.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

__________ Page4 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

vkr/ham

06-05-2026

__________ Page5 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis