Ashok Michael vs State

K.Rajasekar, J

The petitioner, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 16.01.2026, for the offence punishable under Sections 296(b), 109, 351(3) of BNS in Crime No.29 of 2026, registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

The allegation against the petitioner is that, due to previous enmity, petitioner attacked the defacto complainant with knife, as a result of which the defacto complainant sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody from 16.01.2026 and though some previous cases were registered, all the City Police cases have ended in acquittal and there is no previous case pending against the petitioner. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the injured victim has been discharged from the hospital. He further submitted that the petitioner is having four previous case, out of which three are City Police cases. Hence, he strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the nature of offence, the overt act attributed to the petitioner, the period of incarceration and the fact that the injured has been discharged from the hospital, and taking into account that though the petitioner is having four previous cases, three of them are City Police act cases, this Court, after hearing both sides and perusing the materials available on record, is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions:

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, 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 shall 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.