Kamaldheen v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Kulasekarapattinam
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 15.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Kamaldheen
...Petitioner/Sole Accused
Vs 1.State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Kulasekarapattinam Police Station, Thoothukudi District.
(Crime No.238 of 2025) 2.The Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Thoothukudi District. ..Respondents For Petitioner :Mr.S.Poornachandran For Respondent :Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No.238 of 2025 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 Sections 465, 468, 469 and 420 of IPC, in Crime No.238 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is working at TATA AIG General Insurance Company Limited.
One Muthukrishnan has filed a petition before the MAC Tribunal against the petitioner and his company and the policy was produced for the sale claim for connecting with the vehicle number TN 69 X 4545. On verification, it was found that the policy was fabricated one. Hence, the case.
2/8
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
4. The learned Counsel for State of TN (Crl.
Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that the investigation is still pending and the offences are grave in nature. He would further submit that the petitioner has no previous cases. However, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
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 3/8
against the petitioner and the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and based on the order of this Court dated 06.05.2026, the petitioner appeared before the respondent Police for investigation and even according to the case of prosecution, the occurrence took place in the year 2023 and the FIR has been registered belatedly on 16.10.2025, by this time, the material part of the investigation might have been completed and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and even according to the case of prosecution the offences are borne out of records and there is no scope for tampering the evidence and and hence, the interim anticipatory already granted by this Court is made absolute subject to the following conditions:
[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the 4/8
date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchendur, on condition that the petitioner shall 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 concerned and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the second respondent police once in a week ie., on Every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and 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.
5/8
[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 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) 15.06.2026 vsg 6/8
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Thiruchendur.
2.The Inspector of Police, Kulasekarapattinam Police Station, Thoothukudi District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Thoothukudi District.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
7/8
P. DHANABAL, J., vsg
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 9270 of 2026 Date : 15.06.2026 8/8