Disposed

Jesuraj v. The State of Tamilnadu, rep by the Deputy Superintendent of police, Andipatti Sub Division

Madras HC16 Dec 2025CRL MP(MD)/19907/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 528 BNSS seeking modification of a bail/appeal condition requiring daily reporting at Vilupuram police station. The court noted compliance so far and filing of the charge sheet, and directed the petitioner to comply with the existing condition until 28.12.2025, then report daily before the second respondent police station.

What the court decided

AI extract

Jesuraj Vs The State of Tamilnadu, rep by the Deputy… — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CrlMP(MD)No.19907 of 2025 in CrlA(MD)No.1196 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 16-12-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶6

Crl MP(MD) No.19907 of 2025

¶7

¶8

Crl A(MD) No.1196 of 2025

¶9

Jesuraj

¶10

Appellant/ Appellant

¶11

¶12

1.The State of Tamilnadu represented by The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Andipatti Sub Division, Theni District.

¶13

2.The State of Tamilnadu, represented by The Inspector of Police, All Woman Police Station, Andipatti, Theni District. (Crime No.35 of 2025)

¶14

3.Jeyasri

¶15

Respondents/ Respondents

¶16

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 528 B.N.S.S. praying to modify the condition imposed on the petitioner / appellant i.e., the condition in point No.10 clause (b) to permit the petitioner ''to report before any other police station, out of the jurisdictional limits of the second respondent police station well within Dindigul

¶17

1/3

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

CrlMP(MD)No.19907 of 2025 in CrlA(MD)No.1196 of 2025

¶20

District'' instead of ''to stay at Vilupuram and to report before the Inspector of Police, Town Police Station, Vilupuram daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders'' in Crl.A. (MD)No.1196 of 2025 dated 21.11.2025.

¶21

For Petitioner: Mr.S.Sarvagan Prabhu, Advocate

¶22

For Respondents: Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh,

¶23

Government Advocate (Crl. Side) for R1 & R2

¶24

No appearance for R3

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The above petition has been filed seeking orders to relax the condition No.10(b) imposed on the petitioner in Crl.A.(MD)No.1196 of 2025 dated 21.11.2025.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

¶28

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is complying with the condition from 27.11.2025 till today, without fail. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would also concede the same.

¶29

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that after completing the investigation, charge sheet came to be filed and is yet to be taken on file.

¶30

2/3

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

CrlMP(MD)No.19907 of 2025 in CrlA(MD)No.1196 of 2025

¶33

Considering the fact that as of now, the petitioner complied with the condition

¶34

only for 20 days, the petitioner is directed to comply with the condition No.10(b) imposed on him in Crl.A.(MD)No.1196 of 2025, dated 21.11.2025 till 28.12.2025 and thereafter from 29.12.2025, the petitioner shall appear and sign before the second respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders . All other conditions in the said order shall remain unaltered.

¶35

Accordingly, this petition is ordered.

16-12-2025

CSM

1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Andipatti Sub Division, Theni District.

¶40

2.The Inspector of Police, All Woman Police Station, Andipatti, Theni District.

¶41

3.The Inspector of Police, Town Police Station, Vilupuram.

¶42

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶43

3/3

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Jesuraj v. The State of Tamilnadu, rep by the Deputy Superintendent of police, Andipatti Sub Division

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Jesuraj v. The State of Tamilnadu, rep by the Deputy Superintendent of police, Andipatti Sub Division

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramanayagam, Vs Mahalakshmi

Manivel, Vs Thangaraj

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Rajalakshmi

1. Manickavel (Died) 2. Parimala Vs Madasamy

P.Kalai Selvan Vs S.Rama Kazhanjiyam

Senthil Vs Mahendran