Velusamy v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Sub Inspector Of Police, Shanarpatti
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Velusamuy
...Petitioners/Sole Accused
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police, Shanarpatti Police Station Dindigul District.
(Crime No. 165 of 2026)
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioner :Mr.S.Balaji Advocate.
For Respondent :Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.165 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
1/8
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Sole Accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 303(2) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.165 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is running a poultry farm in his property situated in S.No.184/1, Konnapatti and on 26.03.2026 and when the defacto complainant switched on the motor pump, it is not working and he found that the electrical wire length of 70 meters connected with motor pump was cut and stolen. Thereafter, he is said to have found the Adhar Card and licence of the petitioner in his field. Hence, the case.
2/8
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is 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. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.
4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the offence is grave in nature and the investigation is pending. The petitioner has no previous cases. He would further submit that a sum of Rs.15,000/- was recovered from the petitioner. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
3/8
6.Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner and the petitioner has no previous cases and a sum of Rs.15,000/- was recovered and the material part of the investigation might have been completed and also considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, 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.III, Dindigul, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of 30 days and 4/8
thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.
[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 petitioners released on bail by the 5/8
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) 20.04.2026 vsg 6/8
To 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Dindigul.
2.The Sub Inspector of Police, Shanarpatti Police Station Dindigul District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
7/8
P. DHANABAL, J., vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 7689 of 2026 Date : 20.04.2026 8/8