Ramajayam Vs State rep by Inspector of Police

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail connected in C.C.No.190 of 2023 on the file of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Uthukuli.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Raveendran

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ******

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.08.2025 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 454, 380 of IPC in C.C.No.190 of 2023 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial

¶17

Magistrate, Uthukuli.

¶18

1/4

¶19

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

¶20

Crl.O.P.No.2794 of 2026

¶21

Earlier, this Court has granted bail to the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.24663 of 2025 dated 04.10.2024 and he was released on bail. However, the petitioner has not complied with the conditions imposed by this Court and hence, the bail was cancelled. Thereafter, he was arrested and remanded in prison.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this is the third bail application and the petitioner is in incarceration for more than eight months and therefore, prays to grant bail. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner is having 49 previous cases.

¶23

Admittedly, the petitioner herein earlier was arrested and released on bail and has not come forward to comply with the imposed conditions and therefore, the bail was cancelled; thereafter, he is in custody; it was also stated that he was having 49 previous cases, of which, majority of the cases are similar in nature.

¶24

2/4

¶25

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

¶26

offence and the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender and having 49

¶27

Crl.O.P.No.2794 of 2026

¶28

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, gravity of

¶29

offence and the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender and having 49

¶30

previous cases all over Tamil Nadu and if the petitioner is granted bail, he will indulge in the similar offences and further, there is a likelihood of nonappearance of the petitioner for the trial and tampering the trial process. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶31