Vigneshwaran vs State Of Tamilnadu

P. Dhanabal, J

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.03.2026 for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS, in Crime No.75 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that the defaccto complainant is the father of the deceased. Due to previous motive,on 11.03.2026, the petitioner along with other accused, attacked the deceased on his face and left side hand and thereby, the deceased succumbed to his injuries. 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. He would further submit that the petitioner's name was not found in the FIR and only based on confession of the co-accused, he was arrayed as an accused and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and he has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 15.03.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that due to previous motive, the petitioner along with other accused murdered the son of the defacto complainant. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. He would further submit that investigation was completed and charge sheet was also filed before the concerned Court and no previous case is pending against 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, nature of offence, and the petitioner is not a named accused in the FIR and even according to the prosecution, the petitioner herein was arrayed as an accused based on confession statement given by the co-accused and already investigation was completed and charge sheet was also filed before the concerned Court and no previous case is pending against the petitioner, 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 No.II at Karur, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the jurisdictional Magistrate daily at 10.30 a.m., in 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 5560].

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