Mahendran v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Koomapatty
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 26/03/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Mahendran, S/o.Raja, ... Petitioner/Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Koomapatty Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
Crime No.213/2025.. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : M/s.P.Prasad Pandian, For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.213/2025 on the file of the respondent Police.
1/6
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 331 and 305 of BNS in Crime No.213 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 12.12.2025, at about 5:00 a.m., when the defacto complainant's husband went to the goat shed to check, he noticed bloodstains on the floor. When he counted the goats, one female goat was missing. It appears that the goat was slaughtered in the shed itself and then taken away by someone after being stolen. On making enquiries in the village, they tried to find out who might have stolen the goat. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.
2/6
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) fairly submits that the petitioner along with the other accused stolen the defacto complainant's goat and also submitted that four previous cases are pending against the petitioner. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner and also considering the facts that based only on suspicion, the present complaint has been lodged against the petitioner and four previous cases are pending against him and in all those cases, the petitioner has been granted bail, 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 3/6
each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Watrap, Virudhunagar District, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for the 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 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].
4/6
[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 TTA TO 1.The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Watrap, Virudhunagar District.
2.Inspector of Police, Koomapatty Police Station, Virudhunagar District.
2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
P. DHANABAL,J TTA
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.5526 of 2026 Date : 26/03/2026 6/6