Muthukamatchi v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 29.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 12575 of 2026 Muthukamatchi
...Petitioner
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Peraiyur Police Station, Madurai District.
(Crime No.48 of 2026)
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Raghul Priyan Advocate For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 48 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 17.03.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 304(2) of BNS, in Crime No.48 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 1/5
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused snatched the 2 sovereigns of gold chain from the defacto complainant. 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, he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody for a period of 90 days, i.e., from 17.03.2026, so far investigation has not been completed and final report was not filed. Coaccused also released on bail in this case. The petitioner is ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution case and reported that the investigation in this case is still pending. The petitioner has one previous case. He opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.
5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
2/5
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, that though the petitioner has no previous case, investigation has not been completed and also considering that he is in incarceration more than 90 days and I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation;
[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 3/5
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 51730]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.
(K R S J) 29.06.2026 TM To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Peraiyur. 2.The Inspector of Police, Peraiyur Police Station, Madurai District. (Crime No.48 of 2026) 3.The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Usilampatti.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4/5
K. RAJASEKAR, J.
TM
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12575 of 2026 Date : 29.06.2026 5/5