V Karuppasamy v. The State of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD)No.14771 of 2026

1.V.Karuppasamy

2.A.Selvin @ Selvam

3.S.Tamilarasan

4.P.Prasanth

5.P.Velusamy

6.Kannammal @ Kannaathal

7.Manimaran

8.Madathiyammal @ Madathi ... Petitioners / Accused

Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Kadayanallur Town Police Station, Tenkasi District. (Crime No.35 of 2026) ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER :-Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No.35 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, or on their appearance. For Petitioners : Mr.Chokkusamy Balasubramaniam

For Respondent : Mr.J.Vishnu Government Advocate (Criminal Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners, who apprehend arrest in connection with Crime No.35 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 329(1), 296(b), 324(5), 303(2) and 49 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, seek the relief of anticipatory bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners criminally trespassed into the land belonging to the defacto complainant, abused him in filthy language, and caused damage to the fencing, iron gate and other articles found therein. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioners for the aforesaid offences.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the earlier anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed by this Court in Crl.OP(MD).No.2151 of 2026 dated

10.02.2026. He further submitted that the earlier petition had been filed in a haste, without taking into consideration the role attributed to the other accused. He further submitted that, subsequent to the dismissal of the earlier bail petition, the parties have restored peace and that the occurrence did not result in any injury. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the alleged damages have been exaggerated. He further submitted that, subsequent to the dismissal of the earlier bail petition, the parties have restored peace and that the occurrence did not result in any injury. It was further submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Accordingly, the learned counsel prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail.

¶4Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the occurrence arose out of a property dispute, in the course of which the petitioners allegedly threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences. He further submitted that the petitioners have no previous criminal antecedents. The investigation is still in progress. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.

¶5This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the nature of the allegations, the fact that the occurrence did not result in any bodily injury, the submission that the parties have subsequently restored peace and also considering the fact that there are no previous cases against the petitioners and also taking into account the contention of the petitioners that the alleged damages have been exaggerated, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions. [a] The petitioners are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five Thousand only) each to the credit of Crime No.35 of 2026 within a period of 15 days before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi. The learned Judicial Magistrate or Trial Court shall pass orders regarding entitlement of the said amount in its final order/Judgment. [b] On such deposit being made, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on their appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi, on condition that the petitioners shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned. [c] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation. [d] the petitioners shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [e] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [f] the petitioners shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [g] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners 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]. [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

20.07.2026 pal To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kadayanallur Town Police Station, Tenkasi District.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. CRLoOP(MD).oNo.14771oofo2026 oK.oRAJASEKARoo,Jo. ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooopal ORDER oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooIN oooooooooooooooooooooooooCRLoOP(MD)oNo.14771oofo2026 Dateoo:o20.07.2026