P. Pandiyammal v. The Inspector Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 12.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.P.Pandiyammal 2.Mahameenakshi
...Petitioners/Accused
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Nerkuppai Police Station, Sivagangai.
(Crime No. 67 of 2026 )
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioners : Mr.G.Hariharan Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : M/s.S.M.P.Amalaa PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 67 of 2026 on the file of the 1/7
respondent police.
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 296(b), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 67 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that due to money dispute, on 26.05.2026 at about 9.00 p.m., the wife of the defacto complainant committed suicide by hanging. Based on the suicide note by the deceased, the petitioners have been arrayed as accused. 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. They have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that there is no specific overt-act as against these petitioners. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/7
4. The learned Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) would submit that based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, a case has been registered for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 296(b), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 67 of 2026. He would further submit that the petitioners have no previous case. 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 petitioners.
5. The learned counsel for the intervenor would submit there is a money transaction, due to which the wife of the defacto complainant committed suicide and there is a suicide note written by the deceased and the investigation is at initial stage. The petitioner along with others induced the deceased to commit suicide. Therefore, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
6. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
7. Considering the rival submissions made on either side and the 3/7
nature of offences charged against the petitioners, and considering the facts that there is a money transaction between the parties and even according to the prosecution, the main allegaions are as against A1 and there is no serious allegations as against these petitioners and the petitioners have no previous case, 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 bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Singampunari, Sivagangai, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;
4/7
[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of 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) 12.06.2026 apd 5/7
To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Singampunari, Sivagangai.
2.The Inspector of Police, Nerkuppai Police Station, Sivagangai.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
P. DHANABAL, J apd
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10071 of 2026 Date : 12.06.2026 (2/2) 7/7