Mankayarkarasi v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Kallal

ORDER The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 115(1), 308(4) & 351(3) of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No.114 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner, joining hands with the other accused, abducted the defacto complainant and demanded a sum of Rs.50 lakhs and also received a sum of Rs.2,80,000/- and also snatched a gold chain from the defacto complainant by threatening him with dire consequences. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and she has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and she has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that since she is close friend of A2, several cases have been registered against her. However, now, she is ready to deposit a sum of Rs.1 lakh in crime number without prejudice to her contentions and rights. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions, submitted that the petitioner is ranked as A1 and the investigation is at preliminary stage and no one has been arrested sofar and no property has been recovered and the petitioner has 5 previous cases. Out of which, 4 cases are similar in nature. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5The learned counsel for the intervener submitted that since the petitioner has bad antecedents and the co-accused (A1) is also a history sheeter, if the petitioner were released on bail, she would indulge in a similar kind of offence and therefore, he opposed granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶6I have gone through the FIR and also the connected materials.

¶7The petitioner herein is a lady, and though she is involved in 4 similar kinds of offences, the allegation against her is that she accompanied other accused, abducted the de facto complainant and snatched away the gold chain and money. However, now, she has come forward to deposit a sum of Rs.1 lakh to the credit of Crime No.114 of 2026. Considering the same, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶8Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the Judicial Magistrate Court, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District, on condition that the petitioner shall 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 Magistrate concerned, and on further condition: [a] The petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakhs only) to the credit of Crime No.114 of 2025 without prejudice to her contentions and rights before the trial Court with in a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the learned Judicial Magistrate shall accept the sureties furnished by the petitioner. After receipt of the entire amount, the learned Judicial Magistrate shall deposit the said amount in an interest bearing Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized Bank until the final order/judgment is passed in the case in the said crime number. The learned Judicial Magistrate or trial Court shall pass orders regarding entitlement of the said amount in its final order/judgment; ]b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m for a period of two weeks and 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 269 B.N.S.

¶9The trial court is directed to pass a final order recording the deposit amount at the time of final disposal of the case.

29.06.2026 dss To

1.The Judicial Magistrate Court, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kallal Police Station, Sivagangai District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. K. RAJASEKAR,J DSS ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.11711 of 2026 Date : 29/06/2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 29/06/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Mankayarkarasi ... Petitioner/Accused No.1 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Kallal Police Station, Sivagangai District. (Crime No. 114 of 2026). ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No. 114 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.B Santhanam Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.I.Murugesan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervener : Mr.K.Rajesh Kumar