Suthakar @ Shyam Suthkar v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 24.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 12039 of 2026 Suthakar @ Shyam Suthkar ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Moondradaippu Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.58 of 2026)

...Respondents/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.T.A.Ebenezer Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Cr.No. 58 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 189(3), 127(2), 115(2), 303(2), 296(b), 351(2) of BNS @ 127(2), 115(2), 296(b), 351(2) of BNS, in Crime No.58 of 1/6

2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant's son vomited before the house of one Subbiah, the petitioner and other accused attacked him with hands, abused and threatened him with dire consequences on 15.01.2026 and due to this mental agony, the son of the defacto complainant took poison on 19.01.2026 and committed suicide. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The alleged occurrence took place on 15.01.2026. After four days of the occurrence, the deceased consumed poison. Hence, the petitioner is not the reason for the same. Hence, he prays to grant Anticipatory Bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that the offences are grave in nature. The petitioner induced the deceased to commit suicide. The petitioner has no previous case. Investigation is still pending. He vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/6

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, the present occurrence took place on 19.01.2026, but the alleged previous occurrence took place on 15.01.2026, there is no direct nexus between the death of the deceased and the alleged inducement made by the petitioner, even as per the prosecution the FIR has been registered on 28.01.

2026, by this time, most of the investigation might to have been completed, the petitioner has no previous case, and considering all other facts and circumstances of the case, 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, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.

3/6

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of thirty days, 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 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 589 B.N.S.

(P D B J) 24.06.2026 TM 4/6

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri.

2.The Inspector of Police, Moondradaippu Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

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

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12039 of 2026 Date : 24.06.2026 6/6