Kalidoss v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police, Kariapatti

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 08.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 6825 of 2026 1.Kalidoss 2.Ajithkumar 3.Manikandan ... petitioners Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Kariapatti Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

(Crime No.90 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For petitioners : Mr.C.Suresh Kannan 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. 90 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) of BNS r/w. 1/6

Section 3 of TNPPDL Act, in Crime No.90 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 15.03.2026 at bout 05.30 p.m., when the defacto complainant, who is the Conductor of a private bus along with driver, picked up the bus from Madurai Mattuthavani Bus Stand. When the bus reached Mandhela Nagar, one unnamed lady picked up quarrel with them and got down from the bus. Thereafter, when the bus reached Kariapatti, the above said lady along with other accused person gathered and abused the defacto complainant and also damaged the wind screen. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits 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. They are only relative of A2. Co-accused were already released on bail. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature. On conspiracy the 2/6

accused persons caused damages to the wind screen worth about Rs.3,000/- the first accused is having five previous cases including 302 IPC and other offences. The injuries are grievous injuries. Fracture injury is also there. Injured was discharged from the hospital. Hence, he vehemently opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Investigation in this case is still pending.

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, injured was discharged from the hospital, there is no previous case against the second and third petitioners and though the first petitioner has five previous cases, he was already granted bail in all those cases and they are not similar in nature and also considering the all facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioners 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) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kariapatti, Virudhunagar District and on 3/6

further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of thirty days, thereafter, as and when required for further 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 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) 08.04.2026 TM 4/6

To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kariapatti, Virudhunagar District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kariapatti Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

(Crime No.90 of 2026) 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6825 of 2026 Date : 08.04.2026 6/6