Parkavi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27.03.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.Parkavi 2.Dhanapal ..Petitioners/A2 & A3 Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Karur Town Police Station Karur District.
(Crime No. 1083 of 2025)
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioners :Mr.T.Udhayajeeva Advocate.
For Respondent :Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 1083 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. 1/8
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A2 & A3, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and Section 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.1083 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 17.12.2025 due to previous money dispute, the petitioners along with other accused persons went to the defacto complainant's house and abused her and her family members in filthy language and also attacker them with wooden logs. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent persons and they were falsely implicated in this 2/8
case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the offences are grave in nature. He would further submit that the petitioners have no previous cases. He would further submit that injured sustained only simple injury. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
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 petitioners and there was a money dispute and the injured sustained only simple 3/8
injury and also considering the fact that the petitioners have no previous cases, 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) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate Additional Mahila Court, Karur, and on further conditions that:
[b] the second petitioner shall report before the respondent police once in a week ie., on Every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for 4/8
interrogation. The first petitioner shall report before the respondent Police as and when required for interrogation.
[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 appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the 5/8
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) 27.03.2026 vsg To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Additional Mahila Court, Karur.
2.The Inspector of Police, Karur Town Police Station Karur District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/8
7/8
P. DHANABAL, J., vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6140 of 2026 Date : 27.03.2026 8/8