Shanmugaraj v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Subramaniapuram

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 20/07/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Shanmugaraj, S/o.Sadagopan, No. 13, Voc 2nd Street, Byepass Road, Arul Nagar, Madurai South, Madurai-625016.. ... Petitioner/Accused No.3 Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Subramaniapuram Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai District. Crime No. 210 of 2026.. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sathyachidambaram, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.J.Vishnu, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-38AB. For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.210/2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused No.3, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences under Sections 331(3) and 305(a) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.210 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The allegation against the petitioner is that due to the tenancy dispute, the petitioner along with other accused taken away the goods worth about Rs.10,00,000/- from the defacto complainant's shop, at the instigation of A1. Hence, the case has been registered.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and he is no way connected with the alleged offence as stated by the defacto complainant and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that based on the instructions of the premise's owner, he helped him to remove certain articles and now the articles are all recovered. He further submitted that he is ready to cooperate with the investigation and to abide by any stringent conditions including depositing money, that may be imposed by this Court. 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 submitted that the petitioner has no previous cases and the investigation in this case is still pending. He further submitted that the petitioner was the person, who was carrying a large quantity of the stolen properties and was also seen in the CCTV footage. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5Heard the learned counsels and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the nature of allegations and also considering the fact that some of the stolen properties have not yet been recovered and the petitioner has no previous cases, hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions. [a] the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) to the credit of Crime No.210 of 2026 within a period of 15 days before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai. The learned Judicial Magistrate or Trial Court shall pass orders regarding entitlement of the said amount in its final order/Judgment. [b]Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai 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 Judicial Magistrate concerned and on further conditions that: [c] 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. [d] the petitioner shall not commit any offences of similar nature. [e] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [f] the petitioner 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 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]. [h] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.

(K R S J)

20.07.2026 vsg TO

1.The learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Madurai.

¶2The Inspector of Police, Subramaniapuram Police Station, Madurai City, Madurai District.

¶3The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooK.oRAJASEKAR,J., vsg ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooORDER oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooIN oooooooooooooooooooooooooCRLoOP(MD)oNo.14704oofo2026 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooDateoo:o20/07/2026