Naveen Antony Raja vs Inspector Of Police

C.Kumarappan, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.06.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.431 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner committed theft of a two-wheeler bearing Registration No.TN-42-D-8267 belonging to the defacto complainant. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has been under incarceration since 26.06.2025 and is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent, while opposing the grant of bail, reiterated the prosecution case and, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner has ten previous cases and that the stolen property has been recovered from him. He further submitted that the investigation has been completed and cognizance has been taken by the concerned Magistrate in C.C.No.514 of 2025.

Considering the totality of the circumstances, particularly the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, the fact that the stolen property has been recovered, and that the investigation has been completed and cognizance has been taken by the concerned Magistrate, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to 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 Judicial Magistrate Court of Palladam, and subject to the following conditions:

[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 learned Judicial Magistrate Court of Palladam everyday at 10.30 a.m. until further orders and no relaxation petition shall be entertained for a period of 90 days;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283];

[f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.