Rahul @ Rahul Soni v. State Represented by The Inspector of Police
Court: Madras High Court
Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
Judgment date:
Case summary
Madras High Court judgment dated 2025-10-15. Rahul @ Rahul Soni v. State Represented by The Inspector of Police. Read the judgment and case details on...
Judgment text
Crl. O. P. No. 28116 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 15. 10. 2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Crl. O. P. No. 28116 of 2025 Rahul @ Rahul Soni ... Petitioner Vs. The State represented by The Inspector of Police, M3-Kovilpalayam Police Station, Coimbatore. (Crime No. 547 of 2024) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in S. C. No. 178 of 2025 on the file of the Sessions Court for Trial of Bomb Blast Cases (FAC), Coimbatore. For Petitioner : Mr. R. Thamarai Selvan For Respondent : Mr. A. Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side) O R D E R The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02. 03. 2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(a), 317(4),317(2), and of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No. 547 of 2024, registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail. 1/6 https://www. mhc. tn. gov.
in/judis Crl. O. P. No. 28116 of 2025 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with other accused, committed robbery of 118 sovereigns of gold jewels and diamond articles. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the case has been committed to the Court of Session in S. C. No. 178 of 2025 on the file of the learned III Additional District Judge, Sessions Court for Trial of Bomb Blast Cases, Coimbatore. He further submitted that the petitioner has no previous antecedents and has been in custody since 02. 03. 2025. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed the grant of bail, reiterating the prosecution case. He submitted that the earlier bail application was dismissed by this Court in Crl. O. P. No. 24185 of 2025 dated 03. 09. 2025 and subsequently bail was granted to the co accused in Crl. O. P. No. 27621 of 2025 on 09.
10. 2025. He further submitted that the petitioner is the receiver of the stolen property and that only 26 sovereigns of jewels have been recovered. 2/6 https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis Crl. O. P. No. 28116 of 2025 5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the nature of the allegations, the fact that the petitioner is only the receiver of the stolen property and not involved in the actual commission of the robbery, and taking into account the period of incarceration, and bail was granted to the co-accused by this Court in Crl. O. P. No. 27621 of 2025 on 09. 10. 2025, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions: 7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.
20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District Sessions Judge Bomb Blast Court, Coimbatore 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; 3/6 https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis Crl. O. P. No. 28116 of 2025 [b] the petitioner shall report before the concerned Court everyday at 10. 30 a. m.
, until further orders; [c] the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police Officer as and when required; [d] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly cause any threat to the de facto complainant and witnesses; [e] the petitioner to give an undertaking that if required for being identified by witnesses during investigation or for police custody beyond the first fifteen days, he shall comply to the directions as may be given by the Court in this regard; [f] 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 SCC 283]; [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B. N. S.
15. 10. 2025 smn 4/6 https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis Crl. O. P. No. 28116 of 2025 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 District Sessions Judge Bomb Blast Court, Coimbatore 2. The Inspector of Police, M3-Kovilpalayam Police Station, Coimbatore 3. The Central Prison, Coimbatore. 4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 5/6 https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis Crl. O. P. No. 28116 of 2025 K. RAJASEKAR, J. smn Crl. O. P. No. 28116 of 2025 15. 10. 2025 6/6 https://www. mhc. tn. gov. in/judis
Source: Madras High Court. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.