Selvakumar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Ammapettai
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 18/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Selvakumar ... Petitioner/Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Ammapettai Police Station, Thanjavur District.
Crime No. 1528/2022.
... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.Thiruvadi Kumar A, For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- To enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with the case in P.R.C.No. 02/2026 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Papanasam, Thanjavur District arising out of the FIR in Crime No. 1528/2022 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Ammapettai Police Station, Thanjavur District.
1/7
ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on execution of NBW on 27.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 364, 506(ii), 302 IPC @ Sections 341, 506(ii), 364, 302, 34 IPC in Crime No. 1582 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that due to prior enmity, the accused persons wrongfully restrained the deceased Rajmohan, abducted him in a Car with an intention to extract money. The accused persons also assaulted the deceased which leads to his death. They also threatened one Ismail, who accompanied the deceased. Hence the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was already released on bail and due to his health condition, petitioner has not turned up for the hearing, Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) was issued on 16.10.2024 and the same was executed on 27.02.2026 and he is still in judicial custody. He would further submit 2/7
that the petitioner is innocent and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that due to non-appearance, the NonBailable Warrant was issued against the petitioner. The petitioner has 14 previous cases to his credit. He would further submit that the case is pending for committal and if the petitioner released on bail, he may abscond, which would affect the trial. 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 considering the fact that the case against the now the case against the petitioner is pending for committal before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Papanasam in PRC No.2 of 2026; that already the petitioner was granted 3/7
bail and thereafter, due to his health condition, he could not appear before the concerned Court, NBW was issued; though the petitioner has previous cases to his credit, the petitioner has got bail in the previous cases registered against him and as well as taking into account of 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 District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Papanasam, Thanjavur District and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Papanasam, Thanjavur District 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;
4/7
[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 him 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) 18.06.2026 PNM 5/7
TO
1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Papanasam, Thanjavur District
2. Do-Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thanjore District.
3. The Superintendent, District Prison, Pudukottai.
4. The Inspector of Police, Ammapettai Police Station, Thanjavur District.
5. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7
P. DHANABAL,J PNM
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No.11474 of 2026 Date : 18/06/2026 7/7