Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10210/2026granted

Sathiyaraj v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Tenkasi

2026-06-05Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 05.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 10210 of 2026 Sathiyaraj

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Elathur Police Station, Tenkasi District.

(Crime No.114 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Chellapandian Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 114 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 13.05.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 49, 191(2), 296(b), 329(3), 351(3) of the BNS, Section 4 of TNPHW Act and Section 3 of 1/6

TNPPDL Act, in Crime No.114 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 13.05.2026, the accused persons trespassed into the defacto complainant's car workshop, caused damages to the machinery and abused the defacto complainant and his wife in filthy language and also criminally intimidated them and also threatened them with iron rod. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Already civil dispute is pending between the parties in A.S.No.292 of 2026. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. There is tenancy dispute between the parties. Since the defacto complainant did not vacate the premises, he was forcibly vacated by arranging some persons. The petitioner has 7 previous cases. Investigation is still pending. He opposed the grant of bail 2/6

to the petitioner.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, there is tenancy dispute between the parties, already civil case is pending, this petitioner is not named accused in the FIR, though the petitioner has 7 previous cases, in all those cases he was granted bail, and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on 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, Shencottai, 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, thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

3/6

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [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 BNS.

(P D B J) 05.06.2026 TM To 4/6

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Shencottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Elathur Police Station, Tenkasi District. (Crime No.114 of 2026) 3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Palayamkottai. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10210 of 2026 Date : 05.06.2026 6/6