Shanmuga Ananth v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 25.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Shanmuga Ananth
...Petitioner/Accused
Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-corruption Police Station, Dindigul.
(Crime No. 6 of 2026 )
...Respondent/Complainant
For Petitioner : Mr.Veerakathiravan Senior Counsel M/s.Veera Associates For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- 1/8
For Bail in Cr.No. 6 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 12.06.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 7(a) and 7(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 in Crime No. 6 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner is the Motor Inspector. On 11.06.2026, when the defacto complainant, who is the lorry driver, in order to get fitness certificate for renewal of the lorry licence, approached the petitioner, the petitioner demanded Rs.5,800/- as bribe. 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. He would further submit that 2/8
subsequent to the arrest, the petitioner was suspended from duty. He would further submit that he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 12.06.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that based on the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, the case has been registered under Sections 7(a) and 7(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2018 in Crime No. 6 of 2026. He would further submit that the petitioner has no previous case. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and 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 facts 3/8
that no money was recovered from the petitioner and due to his incarceration, the petitioner deemed to be suspended and thereby, no scope to tamper the evidence and even according to the prosecution, the money was handed over to third party, and also 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 satisfaction of the learned Principal District Session Court, Dindigul, and on further conditions that:
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of thirty days, and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;
4/8
[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 5/8
[(2005)AIR SCW 5560].
[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.
(P D B J) 25.06.2026 apd To 1.The Principal District Session Court, Dindigul. 2.The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-corruption Police Station, Dindigul.
3. The Superintendent, District Jail, Dindigul. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/8
P. DHANABAL, J apd
ORDER
IN CRL OP(MD) No. 12339 of 2026 7/8
Date : 25.06.2026 8/8