Mohamed Syed Nowfil vs The State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.07.2026 for the alleged offence under Section 303(2) of BNS, in Crime No.0291 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that on 20.06.2026, the vehicle was parked in front of a rented house, and when the complainant returned on 21.06.2026, the vehicle was found missing. After enquiry, the petitioner along with three others were arrested. Hence the case.

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 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.

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 14.07.2026. He further submitted that the petitioner along with other accused were collectively alleged to have committed theft over the omni van of the defacto complainant and altered the same in order to conceal the offence and that the petitioner has three other cases of similar in nature has been registered against him. He further submitted that the stolen property has been recovered. However, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner.

I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, the period of incarceration already undergone by the petitioner, the properties were recovered, this Court is of the view that further custody interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, 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 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 No.I, Udumalpet, 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., 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 acc 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.