Murugesan v. The State Of Tamilnadu 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 Murugesan, S/o.Madasamy, 73, Santhi Vinayagar Kovil Street Thoothukudi District..

... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch-I, Thoothukudi District.

Crime No. 11/2026..

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Deepak C, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-24AB. For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.

11 /2026 on the file of the respondent Police. 1/8

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2) and 318(4) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.11 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant entered into a sale agreement dated 21.01.2026 with the first accused Raja in respect of immovable property situated at Valavallan Village, Eral Taluk, Thoothukudi District, for a total sale consideration of Rs. 90,00,000/-. Pursuant to the said agreement, the complainant paid a sum of Rs.72,00,000/- as advance sale consideration by crediting the amount into the bank account of A1 maintained with Canara Bank. Thereafter, the accused 2/8

persons failed to execute the sale deed in the favour of the defacto complainant and cheated him. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he was falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has joined duty only on 18.05.2026, that is after the alleged occurrence and he is not a named accused. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Counsel for the State of TN (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner has no previous cases and the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

3/8

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner and also considering the fact that the petitioner joined duty only on 18.05.2026, that is, after the alleged occurrence and the petitioner has no previous cases and there is no specific allegation attributed as against the petitioner and most of the investigation might have been completed and hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, 4/8

before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Thoothukudi, on condition that the petitioner shall 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 concerned and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police once in a week ie., on Every Saturday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature.

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

[e] the petitioner shall not tamper 5/8

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 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 B.N.S.

(P D B J) 12.06.2026 VSG 6/8

TO 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Thoothukudi.

2.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch-I, Thoothukudi District.

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

7/8

P. DHANABAL,J., vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.10909 of 2026 Date : 12/06/2026 8/8