C.Krishnaperumal @ Kittu vs State of Tamil Nadu

P. Dhanabal, J

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.03.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 126(2) and 296(b) of BNS, in Crime No.140 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant and the petitioner are siblings. Due to the property dispute, on 25.03.2026, the petitioner along with other accused murdered the defacto complainant's husband. Hence, the case.

The 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. Already co-accused has been arrested and released on bail. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. Due to property dispute, the petitioner along with other accused persons committed murder upon his sister's husband. There is one previous case pending against the petitioner. Investigation is still pending. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

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

Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, co-accused already released on bail, though the petitioner has one previous case, it is not similar in nature and in that case he was released on bail, since the FIR has been registered on 24.03.2026, material part of the investigation might have been completed and considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nanguneri, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., 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

[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 5560].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.