Harish@ Harihara Sudheshwaran v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Kariyapatti

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 29.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 15640 of 2026 Harish @ Harihara Sudheshwaran

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Kariyapatti Police Station, Virudhunagar District. (Crime No.179 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jegadeesh Pandian

Advocate

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 179 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.06.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 140(2), 115(2), 118(1), 125 and Section 308(4) of BNS, in Crime No.179 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is ranked as A2 in the FIR. It is alleged that he is known to the defacto complainant in this case. With a view to obtain ransoms with the help of this petitioner other accused called the defacto complainant and his uncle and subsequently abducted them into various places and also confined them near bricklin and also tortured them. Thereafter, they collected a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from them. Then they left them in a nearby bus stand. Thereafter, the complaint has been lodged by the defacto complainant. On the basis of the complaint, the FIR has been registered and the accused were arrested.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is ranked as A2 and he is a College student. The other accused have abducted the defacto complainant and his uncle and snatched money. The petitioner is not having any previous case. He is in custody from

27.06.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

¶4The learned Counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution case and reported that considering the previous antecedents of the A1 this Court already dismissed the application in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.14314 of 2026. this petitioner has no previous case. But, the investigation is still pending. In this case four more accused are absconded. He opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶5This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the nature of the allegations, the petitioner is not having any previous case, though four more accused were absconded, considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of incarceration already undergone by the petitioner, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kariyapatti, Virudhunagar District, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of six weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial 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 51730]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(K R S J)

29.07.2026 TM To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Kariyapatti, Virudhunagar District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kariyapatti Police Station, Virudhunagar District. (Crime No.179 of 2026)

3.The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

K. RAJASEKAR, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 15640 of 2026 Date : 29.07.2026