Aravind vs State

K.Rajasekar, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.12.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 126(2), 311, 310(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.726 of 2025 on the file of respondent police seeks bail.

The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner joined hands with other accused involved in snatching mobile phone of the de-facto complainant. Hence, the case has been registered and the petitioner has been arrested on 22.12.2025.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in this case for statistical purpose and he has not involved in this case and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody from 22.12.2025 and now, he is ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there is no previous cases pending against the petitioner and this Court has granted bail to the co-accused in Crl.O.P.No.4034 of 2026 on 18.02.2026. However, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

I have gone through the records and other connected materials, which reveals that it is a case of theft of mobile phone and the mobile phones were recovered.

Considering the nature of allegations, the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner; there is no previous cases pending against the petitioner and this Court has granted bail to the co-accused in Crl.O.P.No.4034 of 2026 on 18.02.2026, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

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 to the satisfaction of the District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate at Sholinganallur and on further conditions that:

[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 report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of three weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation

[c] the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required;

[d] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses;

[e] the petitioner to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard;

[f] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

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