Madras High Court affirms bail entitlement when final report remains unfiled beyond reasonable time, follows P.K. Shaji; binding on all subordinate courts in Tamil Nadu.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | Crl.O.P.No.22321 of 2025 of Manikandan @ Mani Vs The Inspector of Police (CNR HCMA011751192025) |
| Date of Registration | 07-08-2025 |
| Decision Date | 18-08-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | GRANTED |
| Judgment Author | Honourable Dr. Justice G. Jayachandran |
| Court | High Court of Judicature at Madras |
| Bench | Single Judge |
| Precedent Value | Binding |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms |
| Type of Law | Criminal law (bail under BNS 2023) |
| Questions of Law | Whether delay in filing the final report and prolonged custody justify bail under Section 483 BNS 2023 |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The petitioner, arrested on 26 May 2025, remained in custody for 80 days without any final report being filed. Under Section 483 of the BNS 2023, such undue delay in concluding the investigation entitles the accused to bail. Conditions were imposed by way of bond and sureties, daily attendance, and adherence to the P.K. Shaji precedent, which empowers the trial court to enforce bail conditions and register a fresh FIR if the accused absconds. |
| Judgments Relied Upon | P.K. Shaji vs State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283] |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Application of Section 483 BNS 2023 to grant bail on account of delay; reliance on P.K. Shaji’s guidelines for conditional bail enforcement. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The petitioner was arrested for causing a cut injury with a knife pursuant to Crime No. 213/2025. The defacto-complainant was treated as an outpatient and discharged. After 80 days in custody and with no final report filed, the petitioner sought bail under Section 483 BNS 2023. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Tamil Nadu |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts when interpreting Section 483 BNS 2023 |
| Follows | P.K. Shaji vs State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283] |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- First application of Section 483 BNS 2023 to grant bail due to non-filing of the final report within 80 days.
- Clarifies that prolonged pre-charge custody without conclusion of investigation entitles the accused to bail.
- Confirms that bail conditions, including surety identification formalities and daily appearance, must follow Judicial Form No. 46 requirements.
- Reaffirms P.K. Shaji’s principle: trial courts have authority to enforce bail conditions and register a fresh FIR under Section 269 BNS if the accused absconds.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The petitioner was in custody for 80 days after arrest on 26 May 2025; no final report had been filed.
- Section 483 of the BNS 2023 allows bail when investigation is not completed within a reasonable time.
- Conditions imposed: bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of like amount; sureties to provide photographs and left thumb impressions under Judicial Form No. 46.
- Petitioner to appear daily at police station at 9 a.m. until further orders.
- Court applied P.K. Shaji vs State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283] to empower the trial court to enforce these conditions and to register a fresh FIR under Section 269 BNS if the accused absconds.
Factual Background
Manikandan @ Mani was arrested on 26 May 2025 under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 125, 109(1), and 351(3) of the BNS 2023 for causing a cut injury with a knife. The defacto-complainant, Rajkumar, was treated as an outpatient and discharged. After 80 days of custody without filing the final report in Crime No. 213/2025, the petitioner filed Crl.O.P.No.22321 of 2025 under Section 483 BNS 2023 seeking bail.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 483 BNS 2023: empowers courts to grant bail when investigation remains incomplete beyond a reasonable time.
- Section 269 BNS 2023: authorises registration of a fresh FIR if a bail condition breach involves absconding.
- Judicial Form No. 46: specifies surety requirements, including photograph and thumb impression, for bail bonds.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The decision applies and reaffirms the Supreme Court’s P.K. Shaji guidelines.
Citations
- P.K. Shaji vs State of Kerala, (2005) 13 SCC 283.