Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 57375 (MAD)

P.Santhoshkumar v. State Rep by The Inspector of Police Station,

CRL OP/20510/2026 · 2026-07-30

C Kumarappan

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Crl.O.P.No.20510 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 30.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.O.P.No.20510 of 2026 P.Santhoshkumar ... Petitioner(s) Vs. The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Podanur Police Station, Coimbatore District. ... Respondent(s) Crime No.193 of 2026 PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail concerned in Crime No.193 of 2026 pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s) : Mr.K.Govi Ganesan For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.07.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 140(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.193 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20510 of 2026 2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner had abducted the defacto complainant’s brother and his friend for ransom and demanded a sum of Rs.50,00,000/-. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has been in custody since 13.07.2026 and is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. He further submitted that the co-accused has already been enlarged on bail vide order dated 09.07.2026 passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.17714 of 2026, which factum was not seriously disputed by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side). Hence, he prayed for the grant of bail on the ground of parity. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent, while opposing the grant of bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and, on instructions, submitted that the abducted persons were secured on the very same day, that a major portion of the investigation has already been completed, and that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20510 of 2026 5. Considering the totality of the circumstances, the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, the fact that the petitioner has no bad antecedents, the fact that the co-accused has already been enlarged on bail, the fact that the abducted persons were secured on the very same day, and also the fact that a major portion of the investigation has already been completed, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to certain conditions. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on their 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Madukkarai and subject to the following conditions: [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 report before the respondent police everyday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20510 of 2026 witness either during investigation or trial; [e] on breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions had been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court itself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)13 SCC 283]; [f] if the petitioner thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR may be registered under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 30.07.2026 skr Note: 1. 30.07.2026 skr Note: 1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court. 2. All 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. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20510 of 2026 To 1. The learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Madukkarai 2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore 3. The Inspector of Police, Podanur Police Station, Coimbatore 4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.20510 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,J. skr Crl.O.P.No.20510 of 2010 30.07.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis