Thirunavukarasu v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Vangal Town,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 11414 of 2026 Thirunavukarasu

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Vangal Police Station, Karur District.

(Crime No.155 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Bindran Advocate For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) For Intervenor : Mr.S.Gokul Raj PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 155 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 25.05.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 109 and 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.155 of 2026 on the file of the respondent 1/6

police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous motive, the petitioner has assaulted the defacto complainant with knife and her neck and caused grievous injuries. 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. 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. The petitioner's wife borrowed money from the husband of the defacto complainant before 7 years. Since she has failed to repay the same, he lodged a complaint against the wife of the petitioner. Due to that enmity, the petitioner assaulted the defacto complainant with knife on her neck. Hence, she sustained severe injuries. The petitioner has two previous cases. Investigation in this case is still pending. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. 2/6

5.The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor seeks adjournment to file intervening application. But this Court rejects the above said request. He strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner assaulted the defacto complainant with deadly weapon on her neck, thereby she sustained severe injury on the neck. He would further submit that the petitioner has also having some previous cases.

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

7. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, there is a money dispute between the parties, already injured was discharged from the hospital, according to the prosecution, though the petitioner has some previous cases, already in 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 3/6

satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the Inspector of Police, Thanthondrimalai Police Station, Karur 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;

[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]. 4/6

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 17.06.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Karur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Vangal Police Station, Karur District. (Crime No.155 of 2026) 3.The Inspector of Police, Thanthondrimalai Police Station, Karur District.

4.The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Karur.

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 11414 of 2026 Date : 17.06.2026 6/6