Murali v. State by the Inspector of Police

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

09.12.2025 by PT warrant for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 120(B), 147, 148, 341 and 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 in Crime No.229 of 2015 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail. Page2 of 4

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the case is pending in P.R.C.No.27 of 2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Chengalpattu. When the case was called on 21.12.2024, the petitioner failed to appear before the Court and therefore Non-Bailable Warrant was issued against him.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was regularly appearing before the Court from the year 2015 and only on one hearing date he could not appear before the Court. He would further submit that the petitioner has been in incarceration since 09.12.2025. It is also submitted that the petitioner was arrested in another case in Crime No.632 of 2025 on 19.10.2025 and while he was in custody in that case, he was secured in the present case through P.T. warrant and formally arrested. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, if at all the petitioner had absconded, it would be only for a limited period. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent strongly opposed the bail application on the ground that though the Non-Bailable Warrant was issued on 21.12.2024, the respondent police were not able to secure the petitioner for more than one year and he was secured only on

09.12.2025. It is further submitted that there are about eleven previous cases pending against the petitioner. The learned Government Advocate would also submit that due to the absence of the petitioner, the proceedings before the Trial Page3 of 4 Court were delayed. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶5I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

¶6This Court is of the view that considering the fact that the petitioner was absconding for a considerable period and also taking note of the submission of the learned Government Advocate that eleven previous cases are pending against the petitioner, there is every possibility of the petitioner involving himself in further criminal activities if he is enlarged on bail. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

¶7Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 12-03-2026 NSL To

¶1Judicial Magistrate No.II, Chengalpattu.

¶2Central Prison, Puzhal, Chennai.

¶3The Inspector of Police, Otteri Police Station, Chengalpattu District.

¶4The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o6447oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. NSL CRLoOPoNo.o6447oofo2026 12-03-2026 Page4oofo4

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Murali ..Petitioner Vs State by: Inspector of Police Otteri Police Station, Chengalpattu District. Crime No. 229/2015. ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to release the petitioner on bail pending proceedings in PRC No.27/2015 on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate- II, Chengalpattu. For Petitioner: Mr.G.Mageshkumar For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)