← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/10693/2026granted

Kapildev v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Velayuthampalayam

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 Kapildev ... Petitioner/Accused No.4 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District.

Crime No.193 of 2026. ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No.193 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police.

For Petitioner : Aravinthan B, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr..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 13.05.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1) of BNS @ 61(2)(A), 54, 111(2)(b) and 109(1) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.193 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 11.05.2025 at about 4.30 p.m., the accused persons come by covering their faces with masks and assaulted the defacto complainant with a help of a bill hook and caused injuries to him and also threatened him. 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 injured was discharged from the hospital and the co-accused was already released on bail by this Court and no previous case pending against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody from 13.05.2026. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that due to the family dispute, the accused persons assaulted the defacto complainant. Thereby, the defacto 2/6

complainant sustained injuries on his hand and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that the injured was discharged from the hospital and the co-accused was already released on bail and no previous case pending against 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 a family dispute between the parties and the injured was discharged from the hospital and the co-accused was already released on bail and no previous case pending against the petitioner 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. 3/6

10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders: [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 4/6

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) 10.06.2026 dss To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District. 3.The Superintendent, Central Jail, Trichy.

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL,J DSS

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10693 of 2026 Date : 10/06/2026 6/6