Raj @ Rajesh vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police
2026 Latest Caselaw 2607 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2607 Mad
Judgement Date : 14 May, 2026

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Raj @ Rajesh vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police on 14 May, 2026

                                                                           CRL OP No. 12643 of 2026


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                   DATED: 14-05-2026
                                                       CORAM
                                    THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL
                                               CRL OP No. 12643 of 2026
                Raj @ Rajesh
                S/o. Kanniyappan,
                No.14, Ambethkar Street,
                Paranur,
                Kancheepuram District
                                                                                 ..Petitioner(s)
                                                          Vs
                The State Represented by
                The Inspector of Police,
                Somangalam Police Station,
                Kancheepuram District.
                (Crime No.492 of 2012)
                                                                               ..Respondent(s)

                Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS,
                2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail concerned in S.C.No.152 of 2025 pending
                trial before the learned Additional District Judge, Kancheepuram.
                              For Petitioner(s):       Mr.C.C.Chellappan

                              For Respondent(s):       Mr.R.Vinothraja
                                                       Government Advocate (Crl.Side)


                                                       ORDER

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

12.06.2025 for the alleged offence under Sections 120(b), 147, 148, 341, 307,

302, 109 r/w 149 of IPC and Section 3 & 5 of Expolosive Substances Act, 1908,

in Crime No.492 of 2012, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

__________ Page1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an

accused facing trial in S.C.No. 152 of 2025 on the file of the learned Principal

District and Sessions Judge, Kancheepuram. He further submitted that owing to

the petitioner's inability to appear before the trial Court, a Non-Bailable Warrant

was issued against him and the same came to be executed on 12.06.2025. It is

also submitted that the petitioner undertakes to regularly appear before the trial

Court on all future hearing dates without fail, and is prepared to comply with

any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for

the grant of bail to the petitioner.

3. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the

respondent police submitted that the petitioner, who is facing trial in S.C.No.

152 of 2025 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,

Kancheepuram, failed to appear before the trial Court, whereupon the trial

Court issued a Non-Bailable Warrant against him, and he was subsequently

arrested on 12.06.2025. He would also submit that there are 42 previous cases

pending against the petitioner. Therefore, he vehemently opposed the grant of

bail to the petitioner.

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

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

5. Considering the nature of allegations, already petitioner was granted

bail and due to his non-appearance, NBW was executed and the petitioner was

arrested on 12.06.2025 and already investigation has been completed, charge

sheet has been filed and the case is posted for trial, and that though there are

several cases pending against the petitioner, they are not of similar nature, and

also considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court

is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions

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

executing 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 Additional District

Judge, Kancheepuram, and on further conditions that:-

[b] the petitioner shall report before the trial Court 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 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

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

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].