S. Vikesh, v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Vadaseri

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 16/04/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL S. Vikesh ... Petitioner/Accused No.4 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Vadaseri Police Station, Kanyakumari District. (In Crime No. 69 of 2026). ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :-For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 69 of 2026 on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Niranjan S. Kumar-Ms/2931/2008, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.M.Karunanithi, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 49, 191(2), 191(3), 329(4), 324(5), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 74, 303(2) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.69 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that on 23.02.2026, at about

04.30 p.m, the petitioner and others accused are said to have trespassed into the residence of the defacto complainant and abused her in filthy language and pulled her shawl and assaulted her husband and took away the articles valued at about Rs.76,00,000/- in a tempo van. Hence, this case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and has was falsely implicated in this case and he has no way connected in the above said incident. He would further submit that the injured was discharged from the hospital and no previous case is pending against the petitioner. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the petitioner and others accused are said to have trespassed into the residence of the defacto complainant and abused her in filthy language and pulled her shawl and assaulted her husband and took away the articles valued at about Rs.76,00,000/- in a tempo van. Hence, he opposes to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, he fairly conceded that the injured was discharge from the hospital and the petitioner has no previous case and already civil suit is pending between the parties and the same was ended in favour of the petitioner.

¶5The defacto complainant is present before this Court and stated that the accused along with other accused trespassed into her house and took away all the household articles worth about Rs.76 lakhs and hence, she strongly oppose to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶6Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶7Considering the rival submissions on either side and the nature of offences charged against the petitioner, and already civil suit is pending between the parties and the same was ended in favour of the petitioner and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and the injured was discharged from the hospital and the date of FIR is

24.02.2026 and by this time, the material part of investigation might have been completed, 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 anticipatory 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 Judicial Magistrate, Viralimalai, Pudukottai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, every Saturday at 10.30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for the 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 269 B.N.S.

16.04.2026 dss P. DHANABAL,J dss

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Viralimalai, Pudukottai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Vadaseri Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.7443 of 2026 Date : 16/04/2026