Vinothkumar v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Natchiyarkoil

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 28.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 15531 of 2026 Vinothkumar

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Natchiyarkoil Police Station, Thanjavur District. (Crime No.559 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Nambiselvan

Advocate

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 559 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.07.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 296(b), 329(4), 351(3) of BNS @ 118(1), 296(b), 329(4), 351(3) of BNS r/w. Section 25(1A) of Arms Act, in Crime No.559 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner herein accompanied with other accused went to the place of occurrence and attacked the defacto complainant and caused injuries. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is in custody from 05.07.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. He would further submit that the petitioner has not directly involved. They have involved in a protest in front of water Resource Department in Sakkottai. A1 only attacked the defacto complainant. This petitioner is not having any specific overt act. Since the petitioner is having some previous cases, he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody. A1 and A3 were already arrested and released on bail. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4.The learned Counsel for the State of TN (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that this petitioner is also present at the place of occurrence. Since he is having 10 previous cases including two cases of murder. Investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶5This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of the allegation against the petitioner, perusal of order passed by the Sessions Court, while granting bail to the co-accused reveals that the petitioner has no specific overt act, considering the previous cases, the earlier bail application has been dismissed, considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner and also the overt act attributed against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions. [a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to 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 No.II, Kumbakonam, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks, thereafter as and when required for interrogation; [c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected; [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial; [e] 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; [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 51730]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(K R S J)

28.07.2026 TM To

1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kumbakonam.

2.The Inspector of Police, Natchiyarkoil Police Station, Thanjavur District. (Crime No.559 of 2026)

3.The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Kumbakonam.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

K. RAJASEKAR, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 15531 of 2026 Date : 28.07.2026