Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ajith Vs State rep.by,

Ajith vs State rep.by,

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided May 06, 2026
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1456729

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRL OP/11747/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ajith

Respondent

State rep.by,

Excerpt

.....judicial custody on 22.08.2025, for the offences punishable under sections 311 & 111(2)(b) of bns, in crime no.872 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.2. the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has committed robbery with deadly weapon along with other accused. hence, the complaint.3. learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that thepetitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. he would further submit that the petitioner was arrested and is in judicial custody from 22.08.2025. hence, seeks for bail.4. the learned government advocate (crl.side) appearing for therespondent police submitted that petitioner has committed robbery with deadly weapon along with other accused and the trial is posted for engaging counsel and hearing of charges. hence, vehemently opposed the bail.5. considering the facts and circumstances, nature and gravity ofoffences, the manner in which the offence alleged to have taken place, the stage of the case, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. accordingly, this petition stands dismissed. dhk to1. the inspector of police, palladamcr.no.872 of 2025. 2.the public prosecutor, madras high court 3.ii additional district and sessions judge, tiruppur 4.the superintendent, central prison, coimbatore l.victoria gowri j. dhk crl op no. 11747 of

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06-05-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI Ajith S/o.Naganathan, No.1/12, North Street, Keelpasalai, Sivagangai-630 606. Petitioner(s) Vs

1. State rep.by,

The Inspector of Police, Palladam Cr.No.872 of 2025. Respondent(s) PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, to enlarge the petitioner/1st accused on bail in connection with the SC.No.367 of 2025 in Cr.No.872 of 2025 on the file of learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, at Tiruppur. For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Mubeen For Respondent(s): Mr.V.J.Priyadarsana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.08.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 311 & 111(2)(B) of BNS, in Crime No.872 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has committed robbery with deadly weapon along with other accused. Hence, the complaint.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner was arrested and is in judicial custody from 22.08.2025. Hence, seeks for bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the

respondent police submitted that petitioner has committed robbery with deadly weapon along with other accused and the trial is posted for engaging counsel and hearing of charges. Hence, vehemently opposed the bail.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances, nature and gravity of

offences, the manner in which the offence alleged to have taken place, the stage of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed. dhk To

1. The Inspector of Police, Palladam

Cr.No.872 of 2025. 2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court 3.II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruppur 4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore L.VICTORIA GOWRI J. dhk CRL OP No. 11747 of

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial