K.Kuyil v. State Rep.By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13-05-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL K.Kuyil W/o. Kuppan, No.249, Pandiyan Street, Puthumaraiamman Koil, Salem District.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep.by The Inspector of Police The Inspector of police, Ammapet police station, Salem district, Cr.No.100/2026.

..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime no.100 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, and thus render justice For Petitioner(s):

Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi For Respondent(s):

Mr.R.Vinothraja, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Order The petitioner/Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 22.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 329(4) and 103(1) of BNS Act, 2023 in Cr. No.100 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 Kuppan @ Ashok is the husband of the petitioner /A2. A3 is the brother of the petitioner. The allegation is that A1/husband of the petitioner spreads wrong information about the defacto complainant. Due to which, there was quarrel between the petitioner's family and the defacto complainant's family. On 21.03.2026, at about 9.00 pm, the petitioner and other accused came to the defacto complainant's house and abused her husband in filthy words. When the same was questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioner abused and attacked her, A-3 kicked her with legs, then the petitioner and other accused assaulted the defacto complainat's husband, whereby, A-1 stabbed on the chest of the defacto complainant's husband and he was brought to the hospital, where he was declared dead. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is an innocent and he is nothing to do with the alleged offences. The earlier bail application filed by the petitioner before the Trial Court was dismissed. He is in judicial custody from 22.03.2026. Therefore prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would submit that the allegation against the petitioner is that she gave knife to A-1 and instigated him to kill the defacto complainant. Based on the complaint given by the

defacto complainant, the case was registered against the petitioner and other accused persons. The offences are grave in nature and investigation is pending. There are no previous cases pending against him. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side, considering the nature of offences, and the fact that the only allegation against the petitioner is that she passed knife to A1 and further considering the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody from 22.03.2026, the material part of investigation might have been completed, and though the petitioner has no previous cases, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate - V, Salem and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police , daily at 10.00 a.m. until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of

which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the 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)AIR SCW 5560].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

13-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SK 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.Inspector of Police, Ammapet police station, Salem district, Cr.No.100/2026.

2.Judicial Magistrate No.V, Salem.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Special Prison for Women, Salem.

4.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

P.DHANABAL J.

sk 13-05-2026