VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Murugavel v. The State Rep by the Inspector of Police

GRANTED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
22 May 2026
Bench
R.Sakthivelauthor
Case no.
CRL OP 13597/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow R.Sakthivel

Judgment

ORDER This criminal original petition is filed by the petitioner on 19.05.2026 under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner /Accused A-1 on bail in connection with the crime No.108 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. Page2 of 7

¶2The case of the petitioner is that one A.K.Senthil had been working as a booth agent in the State Assembly Election on 23.04.2026. While so, one Sudhagar @ Murugavel, who was also a booth agent representing 'Tamizhaga Vazhvurimai Katchi, tried to make bogus votes on behalf of the said party, which was prevented by the de facto complainant.

¶3Thereafter, at about 07.00 pm, when the de facto complainant and one Anandharaj were riding a two wheeler they were stopped by nearly 15 members. It is submitted that the said Sudhagar @ Murugavel abused the defacto complainant in a filthy language and attacked him with a knife on his throat. Thereafter, the de facto complainant was rescued by one Sivaraman and Rajapandi.

¶4The case of the petitioner is that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Further, he was not present in the place of occurrence.

¶5The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner. Hence, he prayed to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Page3 of 7

¶6The learned Counsel of Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) submitted that this case has been registered in Cr.No.108 of 2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 191 (2), 191 (3), 126 (2), 296 (b), 115 (2), 118 (1), 351 (3), 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He further submitted that there is no previous case against the petitioner.

¶7Heard on both sides. This Court has perused the records.

¶8Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case; the nature of the offences alleged to have committed by the petitioner; the fact that there is no previous case against the petitioner, this court is inclined to grant an order of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions.

(i) The petitioner shall be released on bail in the event of their arrest or in the event of their surrender before the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kurinjipadi, within a period of 15 days from today, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only), along with two sureties each for a like sum of Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kurinjipadi;

(ii) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the Application for Suretyship [Judicial Form No.46 Page4 of 7 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kurinjipadi shall obtain a copy of any one of identity proofs to ensure their identity;

(iii) The petitioner shall appear and sign before the respondent police, daily at 10.00 a.m, until further orders;

(iv) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation by police as and when required;

(v) 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(vi) The petitioner shall not enter into the defacto complainant's house and workplace; and

(vii) On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kurinjipadi/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions are imposed by themselves as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) 13 SCC 283]. Page5 of 7

¶9Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed subject to the conditions stated supra.

22-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order KAN Note:-

1.Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the official website of this Court.

2.All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in official website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code. Page6 of 7

To

1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Kurinjipadi.

2.The Inspector of Police Kullanchavadi Police Station, Cuddalore District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court. CRLoOPoNo.o13597oofo2026 R.SAKTHIVEL,oJ. KAN CRLoOPoNo.o13597oofo2026 22-05-2026 Page7oofo7

Case details

Parties and counsel

Page1 of 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22-05-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL Murugavel @ Sudhakar ..Petitioner / Accused No. 1 Vs The State Rep by the Inspector of Police Kullanchavadi Police Station, Cuddalore District. (Crime No.108 of 2026) ..Respondent / Complainant Prayer: This petition is filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner /Accused A-1 on bail in connection with the crime No.108 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s): Mr. Gandhi Kumar Kalyanasundram For Respondent(s): Mr. A.Amarnath Counsel of Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side)

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.