Jitendar Kumar v. State Rep by Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners, who are A1 and A2 in Crime No.32 of 2026 were granted statutory bail by the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai in Crl.M.P.No.2589 of 2026 on 25.05.2026 with certain conditions. One of the conditions was that petitioner to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- with two sureties, each for a like sum. Finding that the condition is onerous, the petitioners were unable to come out and they are still in custody. Hence, the petitioners filed a petition before this Court in Crl.O.P.No.14290 of 2026 seeking modification of the conditions. This Court, by an order dated

08.06.2026, modified the condition No.(b), directing the petitioner to execute a Page3 of 7 bond for Rs.10,00,000/- with two sureties, each for a like sum. Now the present modification petition has been filed seeking to further modify the conditions (a) and (b) in para Nos.4 and 5 of the order dated 08.06.2026.

¶2The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in this case A3-Ram Raghunath was granted statutory bail on similar conditions. Thereafter, he filed a petition seeking modification of the bail condition before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Chennai in Crl.M.P.No.5070 of 2026. The learned Sessions Judge, by order dated 11.06.2026, referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Saravanan vs. State rep by the Inspector of Police in Crl.A.Nos.681-682 of 2020 dated 15.10.2020 modified the condition by directing A3-Ram Raghunath to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties, each for a like sum and to appear before the Investigating Officer daily at 10.00 a.m. After coming out on bail, A3 complied with the conditions and subsequently filed a petition seeking relaxation of the said condition in Crl.M.P.No.5753 of 2026. On the submission of the City Public Prosecutor that the investigation completed in this case and charge sheet ready for filing, the learned Sessions Judge further modified the condition by directing the petitioner to appear before the respondent police as and when required. Since the investigation is now completed, further detention of the petitioners due to the onerous condition is not required. Hence, sought for modification of the said conditions. Page4 of 7

¶3The learned counsel further submitted that in this case the other person, namely, Govaram Rabri was driving along with the petitioner, when the offence was committed. His son Mohanlal is involved in a case in the State of Gujarat in connection with recovery of 6 kg 319 grams of gold jewels, luxury car from him and his associates. He further submitted that the petitioners have been caught in the crossfire and they have been falsely implicated in this case. In any event, the petitioners are ready to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties, each for a like sum.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that in this case, A4 and A5 are yet to be apprehended, their whereabouts identified and soon special team to apprehend them.

¶5Considering the submissions made on either side and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that the petitioners were granted bail on 25.05.2026. Even after modification of the bail condition, they were unable to come out on bail. Further the condition imposed on the co-accused/A3 with regard to execution of bond, furnishing of sureties and appearance before the respondent police, were modified. Page5 of 7

¶6In view of the same, the condition modified in para 5 of the order dated

08.06.2026 is further modified as follows: "(b) the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties, each for a like sum"

¶7Further, the condition modified in para 4 of the order dated 08.06.2026 is further modified as follows: "(a) The petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, thereafter as and when required by the respondent police. In the meanwhile, if the charge sheet is filed, the appearance before the respondent police is not required."

¶8The remaining conditions, viz., conditions (c), (d), (e) and (f), imposed by the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate/IX Judicial Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai in Crl.M.P.No.2589 of 2026 dated 25.05.2025, remains unaltered and stands confirmed. Page6 of 7

¶9With the above modifications, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is ordered. 23-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order RSI Note: Issue order copy on 24.07.2026 To

1.The IX Metropolitan Magistrate/IX Judicial Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

2.The Inspector of Police J-3, Guindy Police Station, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High court of Madras. CRLoMPoNo.o12682oofo2026 M.NIRMALoKUMARoJ. RSI CRLoMPoNo.o12682oofo2026 IN CRLoOPoNO.o14290oOFo2026 23-07-2026 Page7oofo7

Page1 of 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR IN CRL OP NO. 14290 OF 2026 1. Jitendar Kumar S/o.Gangaram, Pantha, Nagoor District, Rajasthan - 341 508. 2. Dhanraj Sharma S/o. Kishanlal, Sikkar District. Rajasthan-341514. ..Petitioners/A1 & A2 Vs State rep by Inspector of Police J-3, Guindy Police Station, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. ..Respondent(s) CRL OP No. 14290 of 2026 1. Jitendar Kumar S/o.Gangaram, Pantha, Nagoor District, Rajasthan - 341 508. 2. Dhanraj Sharma S/o.Kishanlal, Sikkar District, Rajasthan - 341 514. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police J-3, Guindy Police Station, Page2 of 7 Guindy, Chennai - 600 032 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, praying to modify the conditions a and b viz., Para No.4(a) the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police daily at 10.30 AM and 06.30. PM and sign before the Investigation Officer until further orders. Para No.5(b) The Petitioners shall execute a bond for Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Laksh Only) with two sureties each for like sum imposed by this Hon'ble Court in Crl.O.P.No.14290 of 2026 dated 08.06.2026. For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.Nagarajan For Respondent(s): Mr.Durai Gunasekaran Government Advocate (Crl. Side) Assisted By Mr.M.Arul Raj