Sathish Kumar vs State

P. Dhanabal, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.04.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 194 of BNSS, 2023 and subsequently, altered to Sections 296(b), 115(2) and 108 of BNS in Cr.No.606 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that there was a matrimonial dispute between the deceased and his wife, due to which the wife of the deceased had gone to her mother's house. When the deceased went to his wife's parental home, she along with her family members allegedly abused and assaulted the deceased. Owing to stress and mental agony caused thereby, the deceased committed suicide by hanging himself. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner is under judicial custody since 03.04.2026. He further submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the co-accused has been enlarged on bail. Therefore he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there is no previous case as against the petitioner. However, he opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the rival submissions made on both sides, the nature of offence and that there is no previous case against the petitioner and the co-accused has been released on bail and the fact that though the alleged occurrence took place on 22.12.2025, so far, no steps have been taken by the respondent police and by this time, investigation might have been completed and also 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 X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore on all working days at 10.30 a.m until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which 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 5560].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.