P.Veeran v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Shanarpatti
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10.03.2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE. K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN CRL.OP.(MD).Nos.5011 and 3511 of 2026 P.Veeran ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.5011 of 2026 V.Sangili ... 2nd Petitioner/Accused No.2 in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3511 of 2026 Vs.
The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Inspector of Police, Shanarpatti Police Station, Dindigul District.
(Crime No.31 of 2026) ... Respondent/Complainant in both petitions For petitioners : Mr.C.M.Mari Chelliah Prabhu For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor For Intervenor : Mr.Mohamed Ashik Jaman (in both petitions) PETITIONS FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS, 2023. PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 31 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. COMMON ORDER: The Court made the following order :- 1/7
The petitioners in both petitions, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.01.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections Section191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 351 (3), of BNS and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohition of Harassment of Women Act, 2002 (Under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 323, 324, 307, 506(ii) of IPC), in Crime No.31 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seek bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that pending civil dispute between the defacto complainant and the petitioners, on 26.01.2026, at 01.00 p.m., the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.5011 of 2026, namely P.Veeran/Accused No.1, along with other five accused persons said to have assaulted the defacto complainant and other injured persons and A2 assaulted with steel rod and A3 with wooden log.
Hence, the defacto complainant and the injured persons gave the complaint before the respondent police. On the basis of the above said complaint, the respondent police registered the case for the above said offences. 3.Totally there are six accused persons in this case. Out of the above said six accused, three accused have filed Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3511 of 2026 before this Court seeking bail. This Court dismissed the above said bail application so far as A1 P.
A4 and A3, A5 and A6 were also granted anticipatory bail. Crl.O.P.(MD).No. 3511 of 2026 is kept pending with regard to the second petitioner namely V.Sangili.
4.Now Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3511 of 2026 so far as the second petitioner / Accused No.4 is pending before this Court and the second petition has also been filed by the Accused No.1 namely P.Veeran in Crl.O.P.(MD)NO.5011 of 2026. Both are clubbed together and taken up for consideration. 5.This Court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.O.P. (MD)No.5011 of 2026. He reiterated the same submissions before this Court as in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3511 of 2026, with the change of circumstances as if the injured has been discharged from the hospital. 6.The learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that on the earlier occasion of consideration of bail application, the injured has not been discharged from the hospital. Now though the injured has been discharged from the hospital, considering the nature of injuries, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners.
3/7
7.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners in view of the grievous injuries sustained by the three injured persons. He also submit that the petitioner namely P.Veeran in Crl.O.P. (MD).No.5011 of 2026 has seven previous cases. Out of which five cases were disposed of and the remaining two cases are pending, one relating to the assylum given to his wife and another one is relating to POCSO Case in Crime No.12 of 2028.
8.This Court considered the rival submissions and perused the records. 9.Even as per the prosecution allegation, there is a civil dispute between the parties on the date of occurrence. There was a altercation. In the result there was a assault was allegedly made by the petitioners and other accused. So far as other accused concerned though some of the accused released on bail and some of the accused were released on anticipatory bail, this Court perused the FIR and found that there was specific overt act attributed against all the accused. 10.Considering the incarceration period of the petitioner in Crl.O.P. (MD).N.5011 of 2026 and also the second petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.3511 of 2026, this Court is inclined to grant bail to petitioners with condition to deposit 4/7
a sum of Rs.30,000/- each in Crime No. of 31 of 2026, before the jurisdictional Magistrate Court, without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the trial Court and produce the receipt / acknowledgment before the learned Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul.
11.On production of receipt / acknowledgement for having paid the amount, the petitioners namely the petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.5011 of 2026 and the second petitioner in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3511 of 2026 are ordered to be released on bail, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul and on further conditions that, (a)the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate/concerned court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity; (b)Considering the gravity of offence, the petitioners shall stay at Madurai and report before the Inspector of Police, Annanagar Police Station, Madurai, daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of fifteen days and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation before the respondent police, until further orders;
(c)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness; 5/7
(d)the petitioners shall not abscond during trial; (e)On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners 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 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 of BNS.
10.03.2026 TM To 1.The Judge, Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul. 2.The Inspector of Police, Shanarpatti Police Station, Dindigul District.
3.The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Dindigul.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J TM
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.5011 and 3511 of 2026 Date : 10.03.2026 7/7