High CourtsSingle Bench

Rajasekar @ Rajubhai S/O.Murugan vs State

Madras High Court · Decided on 6 February 2026 · Citation: (2026) 02 MAD CK 1707

HON’BLE JUDGES
K. Rajasekar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 115(2), 126(2), 296(b), 309(4), 311, 351(3) · Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 269
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Original Petition No. 2789 Of 2026
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 482 words

K. Rajasekar, J

1.

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.12.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 309(4), 311 and 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.597 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner herein is involved in committing robbery of a sum of Rs.700/- with a knife point from the defacto complainant and hence, a case was registered by the respondent police.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he is in judicial custody from 29.12.2025. He further submitted that since the petitioner has previous case, this case has been registered for statistical purpose and he has not involved in any robbery as alleged and the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner committed robbery and there is 7 previous cases pending against the petitioner and that the further investigation of this case is pending.

5.

I have considered the submissions made and perused the materials available on record.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the period of incarceration undergone by the Petitioner since 29.12.2025 and though there is previous cases as against the petitioner, considering the facts of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner herein with certain conditions.

7.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruvallur, 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 Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tiruvallur, daily at 10:30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[c] 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];

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