Jayakumar vs The State Represented By Its, The ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2534 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2534 Mad
Judgement Date : 13 May, 2026

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Jayakumar vs The State Represented By Its, The ... on 13 May, 2026

                                                                              CRL O.P. No.12134 of 2026


                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     Dated : 13.05.2026

                                                         CORAM

                                     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE.P.DHANABAL

                                                 CRL OP.No.12134 of 2026

                     Jayakumar
                     S/o.Dharani                                                         ..Petitioner
                                                            Vs
                     The State represented by:
                     The Inspector of Police,
                     Selaiyur Police Station,
                     [Cr. No.99 of 2026]                                          .... Respondent

                     PRAYER: - The Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of
                     B.N.S.S., praying to grant bail to the petitioner in Cr.No.99 of 2026 on
                     the file of the respondent police.

                                       For Petitioner : M/s.Rekha Sivakumar

                                       For Respondent : Mr.Vinothraja, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)

                                                          ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested on 12.03.2026 and remanded to

judicial custody on the same day for the offences punishable under

Sections 309(4) of B.N.S. in Cr. No.99 of 2026 on the file of the

respondent police seeks bail.

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

2 The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with

other accused intercepted the defacto complainant at a secluded place and

robbed Rs.28.00 lakhs at knife point. Hence the case.

3 The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the

respondent police have registered a false case against the petitioner under

Sections 309(4) of B.N.S. and the petitioner was arrested and remanded

to judicial custody on 12.03.2026. He would further submit that the

major amount has already been recovered and the co-accused were

granted bail. Hence he prayed that the petitioner may be released on bail.

4 The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would

submit that the petitioner along with other accused, knowing the fact that

the defacto complainant was carrying a huge amount of Rs.28.00 lakhs

followed him and intercepted in a secluded place and at knife point,

robbed the amount. Hence he strongly opposed to grant bail to the

petitioner. He would further submit that there is no previous case pending

as against the petitioner herein.

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

5 Heard both sides and perused the materials available on

record.

6 Considering the rival submissions on either side, nature of

offences and the fact that already the major amount of Rs.25.00 lakhs has

been recovered and no previous case is pending against the petitioner,

taking into consideration of the period of custody undergone by the

petitioner, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the

following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on

condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten

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

the learned Judicial Magistrate II, Tambaram, and on further conditions

that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily

at 10.30 a.m. until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the

offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of

which he is suspected;

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

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

trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any

inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of

the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or

to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned

Judicial 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].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered

under Section 229A IPC.

13.05.2026

Index: Yes/No

Internet: Yes/No

Speaking/Non Speaking order

cgi

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.

1. The Inspector of Police, Selaiyur Police Station.

2. Judicial Magistrate II, Tambaram.

3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

Copy to: