Shanmuga Sundaram @ Thangam vs State Of Tamilnadu

P. Dhanabal, J

The petitioner/Sole Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(3) and 232(1) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.205 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that on 05.05.2026, at about 03.30 p.m., the accused persons went to the defacto complainant's hotel and abused and threatened him to withdraw the case, which was already given by the defacto complainant against the petitioner in Crime No. 176 of 2026. When the same was denied by the defacto complainant, the accused persons attacked him and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he is no way connected in the above said incident. He has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.05.2026. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police would submit that investigation in this case is still pending and the offences are grave in nature. He would further submit that the petitioner has three previous cases and the injured person has been discharged from the hospital. However, he vehemently opposed to grant of bail.

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

Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and considering the fact that there is a previous enmity between the parties and though the petitioner has some previous cases, the same are not similar kind of offence and in all cases, he was released on bail and the material part of the investigation might have been completed and also considering the fact that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital and the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner from 05.05.2026, 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 No.III, Tirunelveli, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.

[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 BNS.