R.Adams Mathew v. The State Rep by The Inspector of Police
CRL OP/23685/2026 · 2026-08-24
N Ramesh
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 60127 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 60127 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CRL OP No. 23685 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.RAMESH CRL OP No. 23685 of 2026 R.Adams Mathew S/o.Robson, Door.No.77, Collector Nagar 2nd Street, Annanagar West Extn, Chennai-600101. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep by The Inspector of Police JJ Nagar Police Station, Mugapaire, Chennai, Cr.No.456/2026. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Cr.No.456 of 2026, pending investigation on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner(s): M/s. T.Nixon For Respondent(s): Mr.M.M.I.Khaleel, Govt.Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.07.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 77, 329(4) of BNS r/w Section 4 of TNPWH Act, in Crime No.456 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 23685 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5
2. The case of the prosecution is that while the defacto complainant was taking bath in her house, the petitioner who is a neighbouring resident took video through cellphone. Based on the complaint, FIR was registered and the petitioner was arrested. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case only on wrong presumption and neighbouring quarrel and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner. 4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner’s mobile phone has been seized by the respondent police. He further submitted that the petitioner has no previous criminal antecedents. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner. 5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record. 6.
Considering the nature of the allegation, the fact that the petitioner has https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 23685 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5 no criminal antecedents, that the mobile phone of the petitioner has also been seized and also considering the period of incarceration, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail on certain conditions. 7. Accordingly, 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, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ambathur, 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 report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m.,until further orders; [c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] 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 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 23685 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 SCC 283]; [f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 24-08-2026 DRL 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. To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Ambathur. 2. The Inspector of Police JJ Nagar Police Station, Mugapaire, Chennai. 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison II, Puzhal. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 23685 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 N.RAMESH, J. DRL CRL OP No. 23685 of 2026 24-08-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis