Allowed¶6

Kathiravan@Saran v. the State Rep by its

Madras HC25 Sept 2025CRL OP/26538/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, K. Rajasekar J., Crl.O.P.No.26538 of 2025, 25.09.2025: bail allowed under S.483 BNSS 2023 to Kathiravan @ Saran, accused in Crime No.873 of 2025 (Palladam PS, Tiruppur) for S.308(4) BNS extortion of Rs.95,000 via G-Pay; bond Rs.25,000 with two sureties before JM Palladam; conditions - daily police reporting 10.30 a.m. for two weeks, surety ID per Judicial Form No.46 Criminal Rules of Practice 2019, breach per P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala (2005)13 SCC 283, absconding triggers fresh FIR under S.269 B.N.S.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail on execution of a Rs.25,000 bond with two sureties to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palladam, subject to conditions including daily reporting to respondent police at 10.30 a.m. for two weeks. ¶6

Kathiravan@Saran Vs the State Rep by its — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶6

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, accused in Crime No.873 of 2025 (Palladam Police Station, Tiruppur District) for an alleged offence under Section 308(4) BNS Act, should be enlarged on bail.

¶prayer

Court's answer

The Court grants bail taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, and the fact that the property has been recovered.

¶6

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is to be released on bail upon executing a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties, each for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palladam.

¶7

Key takeaways

As a bail condition, the petitioner shall appear before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m. for two weeks, and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.ratio¶7[b]
On breach of the imposed conditions the Magistrate/Trial Court may pass appropriate orders as if it had itself imposed the conditions and released the petitioner on bail, per the Supreme Court precedent relied on; if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.ratio¶7[c]

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MADRAS HIGH COURT - Bail granted. Sole bench of K. Rajasekar J. (Crl.O.P.No.26538 of 2025, decided 25.09.2025) enlarges Kathiravan @ Saran on bail in Crime No.873 of 2025 of Palladam Police Station, Tiruppur District, for an alleged offence under Section 308(4) BNS Act - obtaining Rs.95,000 from the defacto complainant by threats via G-Pay transfer, with subsequent arrest and recovery of property. Petition moved under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; petitioner had been arrested and remanded on 23.08.2025; the Government Advocate noted one previous case against him. Weighing the facts, the period of incarceration and the recovery of property, bail was ordered on a Rs.25,000 bond with two sureties to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate, Palladam, conditioned on: surety identification per Judicial Form No.46 ('The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019'); daily reporting at 10.30 a.m. for two weeks; breach actionable per P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala (2005)13 SCC 283; and a fresh FIR under Section 269 B.N.S. upon absconding.

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.26538 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 25.09.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.26538 of 2025

¶7

Kathiravan @ Saran

¶8

... Petitioner/Accused

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The State represented The Inspector of Police, Palladam Police Station Tiruppur District. (Crime No.873 of 2025)

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.873 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Padmanabhan For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

Crl.O.P.No.26538 of 2025

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

¶19

23.08.2025 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 308(4) of BNS Act, in Crime No.873 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶20

The allegation is that the petitioner by threatening the defacto complainant received a sum of Rs.95,000/- by way of G-pay transfer. Subsequently, he was arrested and the property was also recovered. Hence, the case.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶22

2/6

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.O.P.No.26538 of 2025

¶25

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal.Side) appearing for

¶26

the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner is having one previous case against him and also the property was

¶27

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

¶28

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶29

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the period of

¶30

incarceration undergone by the petitioner and the property has been recovered, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions;

¶31

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his

¶32

executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties , for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palladam and on further conditions that:

¶33

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety

¶34

3/6

¶35

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

¶36

Crl.O.P.No.26538 of 2025

¶37

ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the0 identity proofs to ensure their identity;

¶38

[b] the petitioner shall appear before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

¶39

[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 ];

¶40

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

25.09.2025

dna

4/6

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

¶45

Crl.O.P.No.26538 of 2025

¶46

Note :

¶47

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

¶48

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.

¶49

¶50

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Palladam.

¶51

2.The Inspector of Police, Palladam Police Station Tiruppur District. (Crime No.873 of 2025)

¶52

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore.

¶53

4.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

¶54

5/6

¶55