Ramesh Kumar Alias Ramesh v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Rajapalayam South

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh 2.Kannapiran

...Petitioners/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Rajapalayam South Police Station Virudhunagar.

(Crime No. 622 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioners : Mr.N.Jothivel Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottai Chamy Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 622 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

1/6

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 62 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 622 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.12.2025, when the other accused persons, approached the finance company, where the defacto complainant is working and tried to pledge duplicate gold jewels. Based on the confession of the co-accused, the petitioners have been arrayed as A8 and A7, respectively. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that already A1, A2, A4 and A5 were arrested and released on bail. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/6

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 62 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 622 of 2025. He would further submit that the first petitioner has four previous cases and the second petitioner has two previous cases, which are not similar in nature. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioners, and considering the facts that based on the confession of co-accused only, the petitioners have been arrayed as accused and there is no specific overt-act attributed as against the petitioners and even according to the prosecution, some other accused pledged the jewels and though the petitioners have some previous cases, the same are not similar in nature and in all cases, the 3/6

petitioners were granted bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioners are 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 learned Judicial Magistrate, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders;

[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] the petitioners 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 4/6

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

(P D B J) 10.04.2026 apd To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar. 2.The Inspector of Police, Rajapalayam South Police Station Virudhunagar.

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J apd

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 7165 of 2026 Date : 10.04.2026 6/6