Kanmani v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Kumbakonam Taluk
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27/05/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR
1. Kanmani
2. Sumathi
3. Latha ... Petitioners/Accused in Crl.OP(MD) No.9883 of 2026
1. Ramachandran
2. Backiyaraj
3. Veeramani ... Petitioners/Accused in Crl.OP(MD) No.9884 of 2026 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Kumbakonam Taluk Police Station, Thanjavur District.
Cr.No.191 of 2026..
... Respondent/Complainant in both petitions 1/7
In both petitions:
For Petitioners : Mr.Gurumoorthy S, For Respondent : Mr.D.Venkatesh, Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) PETITIONS FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS COMMON PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.191 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.
COMMON ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/accused, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.04.2026 for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 118(1), 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 324(5), 326(g), 333 of BNS r/w Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, Section 25(1) of the Arms Act and Section 3(1) of the TNPPDL Act, in Crime No.191 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seek bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that on account of civil dispute, there was previous enmity between the parties. On that motive, on 27.04.2026, the accused persons quarrelled with the defacto complainant and assaulted him with a billhook and an iron rod and also 2/7
caused damages to the properties to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/-. Hence, the complaint.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that there was a civil dispute between the parties. The petitioners are innocent persons and not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The injured was treated as out patient. The petitioners are in custody from 27.04.2026 and hence, prays to release them on bail. 4.The learned Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that due to a civil dispute, the accused persons assaulted the defacto complainant and also caused damages to the tune of Rs.7,00,000/-. The petitioners 1 and 2 are having previous cases to their credit. Considering the nature of the offence, he strongly objected to release the petitioners on bail. 5.In response, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are ready to deposit some amount before the Court. Though the petitioners 1 and 2 are having 3/7
previous cases, first petitioner is not involved in any case relating to a serious offence and the second petitioner is having a previous case only under the Mines and Minerals Act. They are ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. 6.Considering the above facts and also the facts that the petitioners are in judicial custody from 27.05.2026, that there was a civil dispute between the parties, that the injured was treated as an out patient, that the first petitioner is not having any previous case of serious offence and that the second petitioner is having previous case under Mines and Minerals Act only and that the third petitioner is not having any bad antecedents, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners with certain conditions.
7.Accordingly, these Criminal Original Petitions are allowed and the petitioners shall deposit a sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) each to the credit of Crime No.191 of 2026, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Kumbakonam, without prejudice to their rights and contentions before the trial Court and 4/7
produce the receipt before the trial Court.
8.On deposit being made and receipt being produced, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kumbakonam.
(i)the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate/concerned court may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book to ensure their identity; (ii)the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;
(iii)the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness;
(iv)the petitioners shall not abscond during trial; (v)On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 5/7
Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];
(vi)If the accused thereafter abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (K M S J) 27.05.2026 PNM TO
1. The Judicial Magistrate No.2, Kumbakonam
2. Do-Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thanjore District.
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Trichy.
4. The Inspector of Police, Kumbakonam Taluk Police Station, Thanjavur District.
5. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
K.MURALI SHANKAR,J PNM COMMON ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) Nos.9883 & 9884 of 2026 Date : 27/05/2026 7/7