R.Dhamodharan vs State

C.Kumarappan, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.02.2026 for the alleged offence under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 as amended Act 2018 in FIR No.02/AC/2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner demanded a bribe of Rs.5,000/- from the de facto complainant for processing the application for subdivision of patta. Hence, this case.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there is no recovery from the petitioner/A1, however, recovery has been made from the petitioner/A2. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner.

I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record.

From the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and considering the nature of allegation and also considering the duration of incarceration of the petitioner, this Court is of a firm view that investigation might have been completed by this time. Hence, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail on the following conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvannamalai, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of fifteen days and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation;

[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.