Allowed

Janarthanan v. State Rep.by

Madras HC28 Apr 2026CRL OP/10723/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal original petition for bail under Section 483 BNS 2023, this Court granted bail to the petitioner charged with offences under Sections 118(1), 296(b), 351(2) and 74 BNS. Bail was granted on bond with sureties and strict reporting conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties subject to strict reporting and conduct conditions until further orders.

Janarthanan Vs State Rep.by — Bail and Remand | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CRL OP No. 10723 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 28-04-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA CRL OP No. 10723 of 2026

Janarthanan

..Petitioner(s)

State Rep.by The Inspector of Police, Moulivakkam Police Station, Kancheepuram District. (Crime No. 62 of 2026)

¶10

..Respondent(s)

¶11

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection with Crime No.62 of 2026, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police.

¶12

For Petitioner(s): Mr.B.Karthik For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Govt. Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Petition seeking bail in respect of Crime No.62 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 296(b), 351(2), 74 of BNS, is on board for consideration.

¶15

Page1 of 5

¶16

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

¶17

CRL OP No. 10723 of 2026

¶18

At the outset, it needs to be pointed out that the satisfaction Court

¶19

has been wrongly stated in the petition as “The Judicial Magistrate Court, Poonamallee, Kancheepuram” instead of “The Judicial Magistrate Court, Sriperumbudur”. Hence, this Court considers the satisfaction Court as “the Judicial Magistrate Court, Sriperumbudur”.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner, pleading innocence on the part of the petitioner, who has been in incarceration since 30.03.2026 and false implication in the case, seeks indulgence of this Court. He further submits that the petitioner and the de facto complainant, being close relatives, had frequent quarrels and on account of such prior enmity, a false complaint has been lodged against the petitioner. He also submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this court.

¶21

The case of the prosecution as put forth by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, opposing for grant of bail, is that the petitioner, who is the maternal uncle of the de facto complainant, had continuously harassed the de facto complainant. He further submits that there is no previous case against the petitioner.

¶22

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) for the respondent Police and perused

¶23

Page2 of 5

¶24

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

¶25

CRL OP No. 10723 of 2026

¶26

the materials available on record and considering the period of incarceration

¶27

undergone by the petitioner, this court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions and accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released

¶28

on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur, and on further conditions that:

¶29

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

¶30

[b] the petitioner shall stay at Sirkazhi and report before the Inspector of Police, Sirkazhi Town Police Station, respondent police, everyday at 10.30a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, report before the respondent police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

¶31

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

¶32

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶33

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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)AIR SCW 5560];

¶34

__________ Page3 of 5

¶35

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

¶36

CRL OP No. 10723 of 2026

¶37

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

¶38

28-04-2026

¶39

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No VKR

¶40

Note:

¶41

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

¶42

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

¶43

¶44

The Judicial Magistrate, Sriperumbudur.

¶45

The Inspector of Police, Moulivakkam Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

¶46

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

¶47

The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

¶48

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

¶49

__________ Page4 of 5

¶50

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

¶51

CRL OP No. 10723 of 2026

¶52

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶53

VKR

¶54

CRL OP No. 10723 of 2026

¶55

28-04-2026

¶56

__________ Page5 of 5

¶57

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

Janarthanan v. State Rep.by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janarthanan v. State Rep.by

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

P.Andappan Vs Deputy Superintendent of Police

Jagadeeswari Vs Inspector of Police

Siva Vs State Represented by The Inspector of Police

S.Dhinesh @ Pallu Dinesh Vs State Rep.by

Iyappan Vs State Rep.by

Mukilan Vs State Rep.by