Uma Farooq v. The State Rep by The Inspector of Police,
CRL OP/21812/2026 · 2026-08-07
C Kumarappan
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 60141 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 60141 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
CRL OP No. 21812 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 07-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 21812 of 2026 Umar Farooq ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Desur Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District. Crime No.58/2026 ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with the case in Crime No.58 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner: Mr.C.Ramaraj For Respondent: Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar Counsel for Government of Tamilnadu (Criminal Side)
ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.07.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 303(2) of BNS @ 317(2), 25(lB)(a) Arms Act, under Section 3 of TNPPDL Act and under Section 136(1) (a) of Indian Electricity Act in Crime No.58 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 21812 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the Assistant Engineer, Operation and Maintenance, Desur Road, Chetpet Division. On 12.06.2026, one Mr.Babu informed the lineman, Mr. Elumalai, that an electricity transformer had fallen down. Upon reaching the spot, Mr. Elumalai discovered that unknown persons had committed theft of 60 kg of copper wire and 102 kg of transformer oil. 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 judicial custody since 11.07.2026 and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for the grant of bail.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent, while opposing the grant of bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution's case. However, on instructions, he submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents and that 25 kg of copper wire has already been recovered.
5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the
learned counsel on either side. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 21812 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, the fact that 25 kg of copper wire has already been recovered, the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner since 11.07.2026 and the absence of any criminal antecedents, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to 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 each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Vandavasi, 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 twice a day at 10.30 a.m. and 05.30 p.m., for a period of two weeks 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 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 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 21812 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 action against the petitioner 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. 07-08-2026 NSL 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 Court, Vandavasi. 2. Central Prison, Vellore. 3.
The Inspector of Police, Desur Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District. 4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL OP No. 21812 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. NSL CRL OP No. 21812 of 2026 07-08-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis