Right @ Vijay vs State

K.Rajasekar, J

The petitioner seeks bail in S.C. No.11 of 2024 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Court, Arakkonam, Ranipet District in connection with Crime No.181 of 2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 364,302,394 r/w 397, 302 r/w 201, 120(B), 34 of IPC 1860. The petitioner has been remanded to custody on 27.09.2025 on execution of NBW issued against him on 14.08.2025.

It is a case of jumped bail. The petitioner is an accused in S.C. No.11 of 2024 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Court, Arakkonam, Ranipet District. The petitioner was already granted bail, however, due to non appearance before the Court, Non Bailable Warrant has been issued against him and the same was executed on 14.08.2025.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner was unable to appear before the Trial Court, due to ill health, as a result of non appearance, NBW was issued on 14.08.2025.. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody from 27.09.2025. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that totally there are four accused in this petitioner and the petitioner is A1 in this case and L.W.1 to 6 were examined and the petitioner is having two previous cases.

Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the fact that NBW issued against the petitioner on 14.08.2025 and he was secured on 27.09.2025 and the petitioner is in judicial custody for more than 3 months I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following 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, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Court, Arakkonam 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 Trial Court everyday at 10.30 a.m for a period of three weeks and thereafter on all hearing dates without fail;

[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.