Ramki v. State Rep.By, the Inspector of Police,

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

28.01.2026, for the alleged offence punishable under Section 126(2), 296(b), 324(2), 309(4) r/w. 311, 351(3) of BNS in Crime No.39 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The allegation against this petitioner is that, the petitioner herein waylaid the defacto complainant's auto and robbed a sum of Rs.850/- and further damaged the wind shield of the auto. Hence, the complaint was lodged and the petitioner was arrested.

¶3Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in incarceration for substantial period and is not having any previous case and is ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that apart from this case, the petitioner is also having one another case of similar in nature. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the him. Page3 of 6

¶5Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.

¶6Considering the fact that the petitioner is in incarceration in this case and though it is stated that the petitioner is having one previous case, considering the nature of the offence, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶7Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, and on further conditions that:- [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; [b] the petitioner shall report before the Trial Court daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks. [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or Page4 of 6 witness either during investigation or trial; [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]; [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S. 13-02-2026 MPA Note:

¶1Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

¶2All 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. Page5 of 6 To

¶1The IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

¶2State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, J1, Saidapet Police Station, Chennai. Cr.No.39 of 2026.

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal-II, Chennai.

4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o3516oofo2026 K.RAJASEKAR,oJ. MPA CRLoOPoNo.o3516oofo2026 13-02-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Ramki S/o. Ramachandran, No.197, Chetty Garden, Alandur Road, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015. ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, J1, Saidapet Police Station, Chennai. Cr.No.39 of 2026. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: To enlargement of the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.39 of 2026 in the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Karthick For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate(Crl. Side) Page2 of 6