Vijay @ Delhi Vijay v. The State Rep By, the Inspector of Police,

O R D E R The petitioner was arrested on 21.06.2025, pursuant to the complaint given by one Vinishkumar/defacto-complainant to the respondent Police for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 310(2), 311 and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 in Cr.No.110 of 2025.

¶2On 02.04.2025, when the defacto complainant was walking near ATC Depot Junction in Gugai Erumapalayam Main Road, the petitioner and other accused persons waylaid the defacto complainant and snatched a sum of Rs.4,800/- from him by showing knife and threatened him. Hence, the complaint.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the co-accused persons have been granted bail by the lower Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) states that five previous cases are pending against the petitioner. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail.

¶5Considering the fact that the co-accused persons have been granted bail and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶6Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Salem and on further conditions that : [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity; [b] the petitioner shall appear before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders; [c] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283]; [d] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

18.08.2025 ssb 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. Dr.G.JAYACHANDRAN

, J.

ssb To

¶1The Judicial Magistrate No.III, Salem.

¶2The Inspector of Police, Kitchipalayam Police Station, Salem District.

¶3The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem.

¶4The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.O.P.No.20586 of 2025

18.08.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.08.2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Crl.O.P.No.20586 of 2025 Vijay @ Delhi Vijay ... Petitioner Vs. The Inspector of Police, Kitchipalayam Police Station, Salem District. (Crime No.110/2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.110 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi For Respondent : Mr.L.Baskaran Government Advocate (Criminal Side)