Shanmugam @ Shanmugapriyan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Panagudi

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 03.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 9593 of 2026 Shanmugam @ Shanmugapriyan ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Panagudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.577 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Suresh Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 577 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections316(2) and 318(4) of BNS in Crime No. 577 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/6

2. The case of the prosecution is that when the defacto complainant went to the shop the accused persons follow her and snatched 10 sovereigns of gold thali chain and ran away from the scene of occurrence in a two wheeler. Hence, the case.

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. Only based on the confession statement of the co-accused, this petitioner has been implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the offences are grave in nature. The petitioner is a gold smith. The stolen articles were handed over to the petitioner and he melted the same. Some of the gold were recovered. The petitioner has no previous case. Investigation is still pending. He vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 2/6

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, the petitioner is not known accused in the FIR, even as per the prosecution two persons have been involved in the occurrence, the petitioner was arrayed as an accused in this case on the basis of the confession statement of the co-accused, he is only gold smith, the properties are also partly recovered and also considering that the petitioner has no previous case, and considering all other 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 bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor, 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 Magistrate concerned and on further condition that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of thirty days, thereafter as and 3/6

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 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) 03.06.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor.

2.The Inspector of Police, Panagudi Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

4/6

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 9593 of 2026 Date : 03.06.2026 6/6