Dismissed¶39

Surya v. The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

Madras HC4 Mar 2026CRL OP/5472/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; Crl.O.P.No.5472 of 2026; decided 04-03-2026; Justice C. Kumarappan; bail petition under Section 483 BNSS 2023 refused; petitioner 'Surya' (A6) in S.C.No.336 of 2023; Crime No.759 of 2021; E-4 Abiramapuram Police Station, Chennai; Sections 302, 34, 201 IPC; habitual offender; 15 previous cases including murder; repeated non-appearance before Trial Court; NBWs dated 04.09.2023, 20.12.2023 and 14.03.2025; PT warrant executions 02.11.2023 and 27.09.2024; formal arrest and judicial remand 10.06.2025; trial at advanced stage; bail denied to avoid hampering trial process; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

None - bail refused; petition dismissed. ¶39

Surya Vs The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.5472 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 04-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C. KUMARAPPAN

¶6

CRL OP NO.5472 of 2026

¶7

Surya

¶8

... Petitioner/ Accused

¶9

¶10

The State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, E-4, Abiramapuram Police Station, Chennai. (Crime No.759 of 2021)

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail to the petitioner/accused in S.C.No.336 of 2023 on the file of the XVII Additional District and Sessions Court, Chennai.

¶13

For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

1/4

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

¶18

Crl.O.P.No.5472 of 2026

¶19

The petitioner was arrested on 10.06.2025, on execution of Non Bailable Warrant dated 14.03.2025 issued by the learned XVII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chennai, for the offence punishable under Sections 302 read with 34, 201 of IPC, pending trial in S.C.No.336 of 2023 in respect of Crime No.759 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶20

The allegation against the petitioner is that, he was earlier arrested in this case and subsequently released on bail. However, since he failed to appear before the Trial Court, a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) was issued against him. It later came to light that the petitioner has been arrested in another case and was in judicial custody, pursuant to a PT warrant. During that period, he could not appear before the Trial Court in the present case, therefore, the NBW was issued against the petitioner herein and the same was executed through a formal arrest while he was in prison in connection with the other case.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that

¶22

the petitioner has been cooperating with the trial proceedings and has attended all the earlier hearings. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to appear before the Trial Court and co-operate for the speedy disposal of the trial. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

Crl.O.P.No.5472 of 2026

¶26

¶27

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the

¶28

respondent police while opposing the bail to the petitioner submitted that, there are totally 6 accused involved in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A6. He further submitted that the petitioner on earlier occasions did not appear before the Trial Court, hence NBW were issued against him on 04.09.2023 and 20.12.2023 and the same were executed through PT warrant on 02.11.2023 and 27.09.2024, respectively; that subsequently, the petitioner failed to appear before the Trial Court for hearing dates in this case, hence again a NBW was issued against the petitioner on 14.03.2025 and the petitioner was formally arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.06.2025. He also submitted that the petitioner has 15 previous cases and the trial of this case is in advanced stage, hence if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, it would hamper the trial process.

¶29

I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record.

¶30

C. KUMARAPPAN, J. stn

¶31

6 . From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), it is seen that the petitioner herein is a habitual

¶32

3/4

¶33

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

¶34

Crl.O.P.No.5472 of 2026

¶35

offender and has 15 previous cases, including murder case, and the trial of

¶36

this case is also in the advanced stage. In such a view, though the petitioner

¶37

is in incarceration since 10.06.2025, it is not desirable to enlarge the petitioner on bail, since there is every possibility that it would hamper the

¶38