Bail conditions must be practical and should not become impediments to liberty when accused hail from distant states.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR Jagir Hossen S/o.Khursid Miah, Raj Nagar, Udaipur, Gotra, Rajasthan - 307 025 ..Petitioner(s)

Vs.

The State represented by The Inspector of Police Perumbakkam Police Station.

Crime No.236/2025 ..Respondent(s)

Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 BNSS to modify the bail condition in Para No.7 from blood surety to the normal bond surety ordered by Hon'ble Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu in Crl.M.P.No.3327 of 2025 in Crime No.236 of 2025 dated 23.10.2025 and pass any other order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit.

For Petitioner(s): Ms.S. SADHANA For Respondent(s): M/S. LEONARD ARUL JOSEPH SELVAM ADDITIONAL PP

ORDER

This petition is filed by the petitioner to modify the bail condition No.7 imposed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu in Crl.M.P.No.3327 of 2025 in Crime No.236 of 2025 in Crl.M.P.No.3327 of 2025 dated 23.10.2025.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner /

accused in Cr.No.236 of 2025 was granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu by order dated 23.10.2025 made in Crl.M.P.No.3327 of 2025 with certain conditions. One of the condition is that the petitioner has to execute a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties out of which, one surety should be the blood relatives and one surety should be a local surety. As the petitioner hails from the State of Rajasthan and he has no blood sureties, he is unable to execute the bail order and he is still in prison for more than six months.

3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner hails from the State of Rajasthan and he had murdered his wife. Considering the seriousness of the offence committed by the petitioner and the manner in which the murder has taken place, the trial Judge had imposed such condition. If the petitioner is granted bail, he would get absconded and thereafter, searching the petitioner in the State of Rajasthan would not be easy and the entire case in Cr.No.236/2025 would get stalled.

4. Considering the submissions and perusal of materials it is seen that the petitioner is an accused in Cr.No.236/2025 registered for the offences under Section 194 of BNSS altered to Section 103(1), 12692) of BNS, 2023. The petitioner was arrested on 23.06.2025. Considering the period of incarceration, the learned trial Judge by order dated 23.10.2025 granted bail. Further, finding that the petitioner hails from the State of Rajasthan, the trial Judge imposed a condition that the petitioner should execute one blood surety. But, after grant of bail, for the past six months, the petitioner is still in prison as he has no blood related surety. Hence, the said condition is an onerous one.

5. In view of the above, this Court modifies the condition imposed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chengalpattu in Crl.M.P.No.3327 of 2025 in Crime No.236 of 2025 in Crl.M.P.No.3327 of 2025 dated 23.10.2025, that - “the petitioner has to execute a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties out of which, one surety should be a blood relative and one surety should be a local surety”, to the following extent:

“ The petitioner has to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with two local sureties”

6. The other conditions imposed by the learned trial Judge remains unaltered.

7. In view of the above, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed.