Neethirajan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Alangulam

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 02.02.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY Neethirajan ... Petitioner/ Accused in both petitions Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, Alangulam Police Station, Tenkasi District.

(Crime Nos.638 & 557 of 2025) .. Respondent/Complainant in both petitions For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sivaprakash (both petitions) For Respondent : Mr.E.Antony Sahaya Prabahar (in both petitions) Additional Public Prosecutor PETITIONS FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS COMMON PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.638 & 557 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

1/7

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner in Crl.OP(MD).No.1820 of 2026, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.11.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 109(1), 351(3) of BNS and Section 4 of TNPHW Act and 27(2) of Arms Act (Corresponding Sections 294(b), 307, 506(ii) of IPC), in Crime No.638 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. seek bail.

2. The petitioner in Crl.OP(MD).No.1827 of 2026, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.11.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 131, 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 351(3), 49, 61(2) of BNS @ 27(2) of Arms Act (Corresponding Sections 307, 352, 147, 148, 294(b), 506(ii), 103, 120B of IPC), in Crime No.557 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. seek bail.

3. In Crl.OP(MD).No.1820 of 2026, the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint. 2/7

4. In Crl.OP(MD).No.1827 of 2026, the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused persons had abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and also tried to attack him. Hence, the complaint.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner (in both petitions) submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that earlier the petitioner was detained under Act 14 of 1982 and now the Act 14 was revoked by the Board. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Court and he is in judicial custody from 25.11.2025. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that there are three previous cases pending against the petitioner. Hence, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

3/7

7. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that Act 14 of 1982 has been revoked by the Board and also considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

8. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail (in both petitions) on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two common sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alangulam, Tenkasi District, and on further conditions that :- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

[b] the petitioner shall report before the Judicial Magistrate, Alangulam, Tenkasi District, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

4/7

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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].

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

9. Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are allowed.

(S S Y J) 02.02.2026 msrm 5/7

To

1. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Alangulam Tenkasi District.

2. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli.

3. The Inspector of Police, Alangulam Police Station, Tenkasi District.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

6/7

S.SRIMATHY,J.

msrm

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.1820 & 1827 of 2026 Date : 02.02.2026 7/7