Annakkili v. State of Tamilnadu Rep by the Sub Inspector of Police, Thiruppuvanam

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 29.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 15637 of 2026 Annakkili

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thiruppuvanam Police Station, Sivagangai District. (Crime No.242 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed

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. 242 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 11.05.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 118(1), 109(1), 103(1) of BNS @ 49, 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 118(1), 109(1), 103(1) of BNS , in Crime No.242 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner instigated the other accused to attack the deceased due to the previous enmity. It is also stated that she conspired with other accused and she had also handed over the weapons to A1 to A5, and they, in turn, attacked the deceased and committed the murder. Hence, the case was registered and, after arresting A1 to A5, this petitioner was also arrested and has been in incarceration from 11.03.2026.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and she was falsely implicated in this case and she has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner, being a lady, is not involved in any previous case. She has been falsely implicated in this case. Since it is a case of murder, the entire family of the petitioner has been roped in, and as if she had participated in the conspiracy, she has been added as an accused. He further submitted that she is ready to cooperate with the investigation and prayed that bail may be granted.

¶4The learned Counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution case and reported that there are totally 13 accused in this case. Out of them, two assailants are Children in Conflict with Law, and the other accused, who directly involved in attacking the deceased, have been detained under Act 14 of 1982 and are imprisoned. He further submitted that the investigation in this case has not yet been concluded. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

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

¶6Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offences, that the petitioner is a lady and that the overt act attributed against her is that she had participated in the conspiracy and handed over the weapons, and apart from that, the petitioner is not involved in any previous case, and also considering the period of incarceration, I am 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.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppuvanam, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppuvanam, at 10.30 a.m., on all working days, until further orders; [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)

29.07.2026 TM To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Thiruppuvanam.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruppuvanam Police Station, Sivagangai District. (Crime No.242 of 2026)

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison for Woman, Madurai.

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

K. RAJASEKAR, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 15637 of 2026 Date : 29.07.2026