← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10601/2026granted

Mahendran v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

2026-06-10Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 10/06/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Mahendran ... Petitioner/Accused Rank Not Known Vs

1. The State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Inspector of Police, Krishnankovil Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

Crime No. 120/2026. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.120 /2026 on the file of the respondent Police.

For Petitioner : J.Yogeswaran, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to 1/6

judicial custody on 28.05.2026 for the offence punishable under Section 140(2) of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No.120 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to owing to a monetary dues owed by the defacto complainant's husband, the petitioner along with other accused abducted the defacto complainant's son in a car bearing Reg.No.TN-84-S-0301 and threatened him and subsequently, deboarded him from the car in front of the Indian Oil Petrol Bunk located near Krishnankoil-Sembatteyan Junction. 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. He would further submit that the co-accused (A2) was already released on bail and he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 28.05.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that due to money dispute, the petitioner along 2/6

with other accused abducted the defacto complainant's son and threatened him with dire consequences and the investigation is still pending and the petitioner has 1 previous case. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail 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, nature of offence, and there is a money dispute between the parties and and the co-accused was already released on bail and though prosecution stated that the petitioner has 1 previous case, in that case, he was released on 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 3/6

Magistrate II, Srivilliputhur, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of 30 days and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. [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 4/6

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) 10.06.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate II, Srivilliputhur. 2.The Inspector of Police, Krishnankovil Police Station, Virudhunagar District.

3. The Superintendent, District Jail, Virudhunagar. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL,J DSS

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10601 of 2026 Date : 10/06/2026 6/6