R.Sankar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Ss Colony
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 26.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL R.Sankar
...Petitioner/A4
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, S.S.Colony Police Station(L& O), Maduri City.
(Crime No.26 of 2026)
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioner :Mr.T.Balarathinakumar Advocate.
For Respondent :Mr.P.Kottai Chamy Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For Intervener :Mr.S.Sathish for B.Saravanan PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.26 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
1/7
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused No.4, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 296(b), 318(4), 316(2) and 351(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.26 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant pledge gold ornaments to the first accused on various dates. Thereafter, A1 failed to give pledged gold ornaments to the defacto complainant. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not involved in the administration of the company. He would further submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated in this case 2/7
and he is no way connected in the above said incident. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the accused persons failed to give pledged gold ornaments to the defacto complainant. He fairly submits that the petitioner has no previous cases. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6.This Court had earlier directed that the matter be placed before mediation. The matter has now been settled through mediation.
3/7
7. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner and since the matter has now been settled through mediation, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on anticipatory 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 Judicial Magistrate Court No.5, Madurai, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent once in a month ie., on the first working day of Every English Calender month at 10.30 a.m., for 4/7
a period of three months and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.
[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.
[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
[e] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
[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 petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as 5/7
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.
(P D B J) 26.03.2026 vsg To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court No.5, Madurai. 2.The Inspector of Police, S.S.Colony Police Station(L& O), Maduri City.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
P. DHANABAL, J., vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 1419 of 2026 Date : 26.03.2026 7/7