Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12778 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 12778 of 2026 Bharath ...Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Palanichettypatti Police Station, Theni District. (Crime No.358 of 2026) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Balaji 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. 358 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 10.06.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 319, 137(2) and 309(4) of BNS @ 319, 137(2) and 310(4) of BNS, in Crime No.358 of 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12778 of 2026 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is ranked as A6. The accused are known to the defacto complainant. This petitioner joined hands with other accused, mainly A1 and A2 for the purpose of committing robbery they abducted him and threatened him and by using the ATM card taken away nearly Rs.2 lakhs. Subsequently, defacto complainant was rescued himself and lodged the complaint before the respondent police. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent police has registered a false case against the petitioner and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that initially the petitioner's name was not found in the FIR. Thereafter, while filing the alteration report the petitioner's name was implicated, as if the petitioner was involved in abutment and money was recovered from him. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.06.2026 and he is ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12778 of 2026 case and reported that totally there are 6 accused in this case. All the accused were arrested and no one has been released on bail. The defacto complainant was abducted by A1 in the first Car and subsequently, A1 was assisted by other accused, who came by another vehicle, which was also followed the A1's vehicle. The petitioner is the owner of the second vehicle. He further submitted that the investigation has not been completed. He opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. 5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6.Considering the nature of offences, that A1 who was acting driver of the defacto complainant and participated in the conspiracy with other accused, accordingly, A1 and A2 abducted the defacto complainant, taken him to a lonely place, snatched away the jewels and ATM Card and also withdrew some money, statement also clearly implicated the role of the petitioner, sum of Rs. 5,600/- also have been recovered from this petitioner and that the investigation has not been concluded and it is in primary stage, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12778 of 2026 7.Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. (K R S J) 30.06.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Theni. 2.The Inspector of Police, Palanichettypatti Police Station, Theni District. (Crime No.358 of 2026) 3.The Superintendent, District Jail, Theni. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12778 of 2026 K. RAJASEKAR, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12778 of 2026 Date : 30.06.2026 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis