V.Thirupathi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 09.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL V.Thirupathi ...Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Madurai City.

(Crime No.03 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner:Mr.G.Mohankumar For Respondent:Mr.M.Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 03 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

1/8

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Sole accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.03.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, in Crime No.03 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant approached the office of the Assistant Engineer, TANGEDCO, Pasumalai, Thirunagar, Madurai, for shifting of the EB line running across the complainants land located at Thirupparankundram in Rs.No.56/22A and the petitioner, who is working therein as Junior Engineer and demanded a bribe of Rs.10,000/-. On receipt of the complaint from the defacto complainant, on 25.03.2026 the respondent Police organised a trap on 25.03.2026 between 16.45and 16.50 hrs, the petitioner accepted the tainted 2/8

currencies from the complainant and phenolphthalein test of the petitioner turned positive. 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. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.03.2026. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the investigation is pending. He would further submit that the petitioner has no previous cases. However, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

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

3/8

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and considering the fact that no previous cases are pending against the petitioner and the material part of the investigation might have been completed and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail 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 learned Special Court for prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Madurai, and on further conditions that:

4/8

[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;

[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 5/8

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 BNS.

(P D B J) 09.04.2026 vsg 6/8

To 1.The learned Special Court for prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption, Madurai City.

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

7/8

P. DHANABAL, J vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 6941 of 2026 Date : 09.04.2026 8/8