M.Sasi Kumar v. State Represented by the Inspector of Police

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

16.04.2026 on the execution of a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) that had been pending against him since 17.10.2025, for alleged offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, and 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), in the file of the Page2 of 5 respondent police, seeks bail. The petitioner is arrayed as Accused No.6 (A6).

¶2The case of the prosecution is that, due to previous enmity, the petitioner, along with other accused persons, formed an unlawful assembly equipped with deadly weapons and attempted to commit the murder of the defacto complainant, namely Rakesh, on 09.04.2021. After the completion of the investigation, a charge sheet has already been filed for the alleged offences. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and is not connected with the offences alleged in the complaint. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since

16.04.2026 and that the charge sheet has already been filed; hence, the counsel prayed for the grant of bail.

¶4The said contention was strongly opposed by the learned Government Counsel (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent, who submitted that the petitioner is a history-sheeter with 13 previous cases pending against him. He further submitted that after an NBW was ordered by the Court on 17.10.2025, the petitioner evaded the process of law, and the respondent police could only secure his arrest on 16.04.2026. He rightly contended that given his track record, there is every possibility of recidivism, and enlarging the petitioner on Page3 of 5 bail would further delay the trial proceedings.

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

¶6Taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances and the submissions made by the learned Government Counsel, the petitioner has a severe criminal history as a history-sheeter with 13 criminal antecedents. Furthermore, the petitioner absconded for nearly six months before being secured via an NBW, demonstrating a clear tendency to evade justice. This Court finds merit in the submission that releasing the petitioner creates a strong likelihood of recidivism, which would obstruct and delay the trial. Consequently, in the interest of securing a speedy disposal of the trial, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.

¶7Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 08-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Jeni Page4 of 5 To

1.The VI Additional City Civil Court, Chennai.

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

3.The Inspector of Police, R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station, Chennai.

4.The Public Prosecutor. CRLoOPoNo.o14345oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. Jeni CRLoOPoNo.o14345oofo2026 08-06-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN M.Sasi Kumar ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Represented by its The Inspector of Police R-6, Kumaran Nagar Police Station, Chennai. SC.No.304 of 2024 ..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail in S.C.No.304 of 2024, arising out of Crime No.145 of 2021 on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice For Petitioner(s): Mr.D.Jaiganesh For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side)