Sankarapandian v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Amathur

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Sankrapandian

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Amathur Police Station Virudhunagar.

(Crime No. 179 of 2026 )

...Respondent

For Petitioner : Mr.E.Marees Kumar 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. 179 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/6

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 288 of BNS, 2023 r/w 9(B)(1)(a) of IE Act in Crime No. 179 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was running a fire works factory and subsequently, the license of the petitioner was suspended. However, during surprise inspection conducted by the Licensing Authority, the petitioner was manufacturing some other crackers inside the premises. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit 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 prayed to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit 2/6

that based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 288 of BNS, 2023 r/w 9(B)(1)(a) of IE Act in Crime No. 179 of 2026. He would further submit that the petitioner's licence was already suspended and nobody was injured in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has three previous cases, which are similar in nature. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

6. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and considering the facts that even according to the prosecution, already the petitioner was having license and however, during the suspension period, the petitioner manufactured crackers and nobody was injured in this case and though the petitioner has three previous cases, in all cases, bail was granted to him, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to 3/6

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 - II, Virudhunagar, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of thirty days, and thereafter as and when required for the 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 4/6

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 B.N.S.

(P D B J) 30.04.2026 apd To 1.The Judicial Magistrate - II, Virudhunagar. 2.The Inspector of Police, Amathur Police Station Virudhunagar.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J apd

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 8822 of 2026 Date : 30.04.2026 6/6