Venkatesan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Venkatesan ...Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police, Thenkarai Police Station, Theni District.

(Crime No.699 of 2025)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner:Mr.M.Jothi Basu For Respondent:Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No.699 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

1/8

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 306 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.699 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's son is working as a Head Clerk in the Additional District and Sessions Court, Periyakulam, Theni District. In the year 2005, the petitioner's father namely, Sivasubramanian has filed a suit in O.S.No.79 of 2005 before the Sub Court, Periyakulam, Theni District for partition and permanent injuntion. The defendants 1 and 2 are brothers of the petitioner's father. The third defendant is the president of Lakshmipuram Panchayat. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner's father filed a petition in I.A.No.302 of 2005 for the 2/8

relief of Ad-interim injunction restraining the third respondent from providing drainage connection to the second defendant's house. The second defendant had filed a petition in I.A.No. 76 of 2006 for Ad-interim injunction restraining the plaintiff from laying water and drainage connection to his property. During hearing, the plaintiff has marked two documents and the second defendant has marked 18 documents. The said 18 documents were stolen by the petitioner through record clerk. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an 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. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 14.03.2026. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 3/8

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Police would submit that investigation is still pending. He would further submit that the petitioner has no previous cases. Therefore, he vehemently, opposed to grant of bail.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and considering the fact that there is a civil dispute pending between the parties and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and the investigation in this case might have been completed and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner from 14.03.2026, this Court is inclined to grant bail 4/8

to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on 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 Judicial Magistrate Court, Periyakulam, Theni District, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which she is suspected;

5/8

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[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 6/8

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 BNS.

(P D B J) 16.04.2026 vsg To 1.The Judicial Magistrate Court, Periyakulam, Theni District.

2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Thenkarai Police Station, Theni District.

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai District.

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

7/8

P.DHANABAL, J., vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6427 of 2026 Date : 16.04.2026 8/8