← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/8059/2026granted

Soosai Mary v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Sub Inspector Of Police, Panagudi

2026-04-29Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 29/04/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

1. Soosai Mary

2. Rex @ Panirex ... Petitioners/Accused No.2&3 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Sub-Inspector of Police, PanagudiPolice Station, Tirunelveli District.

Crime No.460/2026. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.460/2026 on the file of the respondent Police.

For Petitioners : Anand R., Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 324(4) & 351(3) of BNS, 2023 (Corresponding Sections 294(b), 323, 427 and 506(ii) of IPC) and subsequently, altered into Section 296(b), 115(2), 324(4), 351(3) of BNS, 2023 and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Act, in Crime No.460 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 08.04.2026 at about 10.00 p.m, due to previous enmity, the petitioners abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and assaulted her and threatened her with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they are no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the injured has sustained only simple injury and it is a case and case in counter and counter case has been registered against the defacto complainant in Crime No.457 of 2026 and the co-accused (A1) 2/6

was arrested and released on bail and no previous cases is pending against the petitioners. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that due to previous enmity, the petitioners abused the defacto complainant in filthy language and assaulted her and threatened her with dire consequences and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. He would further submit that the injured has sustained only simple injury and it is a case and case in counter and counter case has been registered against the defacto complainant in Crime No.457 of 2026 and the co-accused (A1) was arrested and released on bail and no previous cases is pending against the petitioners.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature 3/6

of offences charged against the petitioners, and the injured has sustained only simple injury and also treated only as out patient and it is a case and case in counter and counter case has been registered against the defacto complainant and the co-accused was already arrested and released on bail and no previous cases is pending against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are 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, Vallioor, Tirunelveli District, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the interrogation.

[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of 4/6

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) 29.04.2026 dss P. DHANABAL, J 5/6

dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Vallioor, Tirunelveli District. 2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, PanagudiPolice Station, Tirunelveli District. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.8059 of 2026 Date : 29/04/2026 6/6