Muthukumar @ Sappani v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thiruthangal
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 01/04/2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Muthukumar @ Sappani ... Petitioner/Accused No.2 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Thiruthangal Police Station, Virudhungar District.
Crime No.342 of 2025. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.342 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.
For Petitioner : Jagadeeshwaran R, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.P.Kottaichamy, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 25(1A) Arms Act in Crime No.342 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that on 24.08.2025, at about 12.15 p.m., the petitioners and others were armed with billhooks and threatened the public. Hence, a case has been registered against the accused for the aforesaid offences. Hence, this petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and has was falsely implicated in this case and he has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that no one has sustained injury in this occurrence. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioners and others were armed with billhooks and threatened 2/6
the public and the petitioner is having 9 previous cases. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, he fairly conceded that no one has sustained injury in the alleged occurrence and A1 was already arrested.
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 nobody has sustained injury in this case and A1 was already arrested and though the petitioner has previous cases, all are not similar in nature, 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 each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Sivakasi, Viruthunagar District, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders. 3/6
[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]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
01.04.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.2, 4/6
Sivakasi, Viruthunagar District, 2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruthangal Police Station, Virudhungar District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
P. DHANABAL,J dss
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.6314 of 2026 Date : 01/04/2026 6/6