Sivakumar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 6655 of 2026 Sivakumar

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thiruppathur Town Police Station, Sivagangai District.

(Crime No.26 of 2022)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Manojkumar Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 26 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 302 and 380 of IPC, in Crime No.26 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 1/5

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant lodged a complaint stating that some persons said to have murdered his mother and taken away the golden jewels. During the course of investigation the petitioner was arrested on 04.03.2026 on the basis of the circumstantial evidence.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. There is no specific overt act against the petitioner. In another case the petitioner was compelled to undergo Narco Analysis Test at Gujarat. The same was refused by him. Hence, this false case has been foisted against him. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The petitioner is the sole accused in this case. The alleged occurrence taken place in the year 2022. he was remanded in one another case. Subsequently, he was produced by PT warrant. He pledged the jewels. After the recovery of jewels they identified the accused. The accused have close nexus with the defacto complainant's house. 2/5

On the date of occurrence the defacto complainant went to Chennai. At that time the petitioner went to the house of the deceased attacked her and taken away the jewels. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. The petitioner has one previous case. Investigation is not still completed.

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, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, investigation is not yet completed, he has one previous case, I am declined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. (P D B J) 20.04.2026 TM To 1.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppathur Town Police Station, Sivagangai District.

3/5

(Crime No.26 of 2022) 2.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Coimbatore. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6655 of 2026 Date : 20.04.2026 5/5