Allowed

Sakthimurugan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC14 May 2025CRL OP(MD)/8618/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two accused arrested for waylaying a complainant and snatching gold jewels at knifepoint sought bail under Section 483 BNSS. Noting their custody since April 2025 and recovery of properties from another accused, the court granted bail on bond with conditions including daily police reporting.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners ordered to be released on bail on bond of Rs.15,000 each with two sureties, subject to conditions including daily police reporting till final report.

Sakthimurugan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

CRL OP(MD)No.8618 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

( Criminal Jurisdiction )

¶4

Date : 14.05.2025

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

The Hon`ble Mr.Justice K.RAJASEKAR

¶7

CRL OP(MD)No.8618 of 2025

¶8

1.Sakthimurugan 2.Ayyappan ... Petitioners Vs The Inspector of Police, Kamuthi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. (Crime No.77 of 2025) ... Respondent For Petitioners : Mr.V.Malaiyendran : For Respondent Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar, Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 BNSS, 2023 PRAYER :-

¶9

For Bail in Crime No.77 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

¶10

1/4

¶11

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

¶12

CRL OP(MD)No.8618 of 2025

¶13

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

¶14

The petitioners/Accused Nos.2 & 3, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.04.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 309(4), 311 BNS in Crime No.77 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

¶15

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners joined hands with the other accused, waylaid the defacto complainant and attacked him and at knife point, they have taken away 2 ½ sovereigns of gold jewels. Hence, the complaint.

¶16

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the properties are recovered from first accused and the petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. However, they have been arrested and they are languishing in jail from 10.04.2025. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail.

¶17

4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent submitted that the first petitioner is having one previous case for the offence under Sections 294(b), 323 IPC and the second petitioner is having one previous case for the offence under Arms Act. Hence, he opposed to grant bail.

¶18

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering that the petitioners are in custody from 10.04.2025, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners on certain conditions.

¶19

6.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the petitioners

¶20

2/4

¶21

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

¶22

CRL OP(MD)No.8618 of 2025

¶23

are ordered to be released on bail, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Kamuthi;

¶24

(i)the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate/concerned court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶25

(ii)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., till the final report is filed before the concerned Court;

¶26

(iii)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness;

¶27

iv)the petitioners shall not abscond during trial.

¶28

v)On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail

¶29

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)AIR SCW 5560].

¶30

/ TRUE COPY /

¶31

/05/2025

¶32

Sub-Assistant Registrar ( C.S. I / II / III / IV )

¶33

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,

¶34

Madurai - 625 023.

¶35

3/4

¶36

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

¶37

CRL OP(MD)No.8618 of 2025

¶38

gns TO

¶39

The Judicial Magistrate, Kamuthi.

¶40

2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE RAMANATHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶41

The Officer incharge, District Jail, Ramanathapuram.

¶42

The Inspector of Police, Kamuthi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

¶43

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

¶44

ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.8618 of 2025 Date :14/05/2025

¶45

MK/SAR /15.05.2025 4P/6C

¶46

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023

¶47

4/4

¶48

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

Sakthimurugan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sakthimurugan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhakshinamoorthy (Deceased) Vs the Executive Engineer

Pavithra Masi Vs Superintending Engineer

Thangavel Vs Manimegalai

Ramesh Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Manoj Vs State of Tamil Nadu, rep by The Inspector of Police

Dhilip Mohammed Vs The State of Tamil Nadu