CRL OP/9113/2026 of Rajendran Vs State Rep by

CRL OP No. 9113 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 9113 of 2026 Rajendran ..Petitioner Vs The State by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Ariyalur District, Crime No.8 of 2019 ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in C.C.No.6 of 2021 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate-I, Ariyalur in Crime No.8 of 2019. For Petitioner: Mr.C.Ganesh Pandian For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 16.08.2025 for the alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 417, 420, 506(i) of Indian Penal Code, 1860, in Crime No.8 of 2019 on the file of the responde nt police, seeks bail. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9113 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had cheated a s um of Rs.47,00,000/- from the defacto complainant under the guise of arranging overseas jobs. It is further seen that the petitioner was abroad at the time of registration of FIR and absconding charge sheet was filed and NBW was issued on 08.09.2022 and executed on 16.08.2025. The case is now pending in C.C.No.6 of 2021. Hence, the case was registered. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was confined in Qatar Central Prison and therefore he was not aware of the proceedings and NBW was issued without proper service. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 16.08.2025 a nd witnesses LW1 to LW3 have already been examined. It is also subm itted that the petitioner was not absconding wilfully and due to his confinement abr oad, he could not appear before the Court. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that this is a case of the year 2019 and the peti tioner absconded from 08.09.2022 and was secured only after three years. It is fur ther submitted that due to the conduct of the petitioner, there was delay in trial and even now if he is released on bail, there is every possibility of absconding again and delaying the proceedings. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9113 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 5. Considering the submission of the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that the petitioner had absconded for more than three years and was secured only after three years. As rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), there is clear flight risk and the case is of the year 2019 and the trial is already in progress. Therefore, this Court is of the view that this is not an appropriate stage to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. 6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 17-04-2026 NSL To 1. The Judicial Magistrate-I, Ariyalur. 2. Central Prison, Tirchirapalli. 3. The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Ariyalur District. 4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 9113 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. NSL CRL OP No. 9113 of 2026 17-04-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis