High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 MAD CK 1564

Jayakumar vs The State Represented by The Inspector of Police

Madras High Court · Decided on 8 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
N. Ramesh, J
CASE NUMBER
CRL OP No. 25254 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 668 words

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.06.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 191(2), 191(3), 296(b) 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 351(3) of BNS altered into 126(2), 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 351(3), 103(1) of BNS in Crime No.122 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that on 14.06.2026, A1 and A6 waylaid the deceased and demanding money, when the deceased refused the same, there is a scuffle ensued between the deceased and the accused. Thereafter, the deceased return back to his home. At this juncture, the accused in this case came to the house of the deceased and abducted him, further it is alleged the accused in this case assaulted the deceased all over the body using wooden log indiscriminately. Thereafter, the deceased was forwarded to Government Hospital Vellore for further treatment. On 15-06-2026 at about 16.20 Hrs, the said Nagapoosanam was died. Based on the intimation received from the Government Hospital, Vellore, the alteration report was filled by the respondent police. Hence, the case.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that there is no specific overt act against this petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

4.

Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner has been incarcerated since 15.06.2026. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

5.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.

6.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case; taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side); considering the totality of the circumstances, and that there is no specific overt act against this petitioner and considering the fact that the co-accused has been already enlarged on bail, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.

7.

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 Judicial Magistrate, Gudiyatham, 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 everyday at 10.30 a.m., and 05.30 p.m until further orders;

[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 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];

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

Note:

1.

Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

2.

All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.