Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 27527 (MAD)

Samathana Gandhi v. The State of Tamilnadu

CRL OP(MD)/9926/2026 · 2026-05-27

K Murali Shankar

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CRL OP(MD). No.9926 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 27/05/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR CRL OP(MD). No.9926 of 2026 Samathana Gandhi, S/o.Chinnadurai, 28b, Srineevas Nagar, Keezha Asaripallam, Agasteeswaram Taluk, Kanniyakumari District. ... Petitioner/Accused Vs The State of Tamilnadu, Rep By, The Inspector of Police, South Police Station, Thoothukudi. Cr.No.545 of 2026. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.N.Pragalathan, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.D.Venkatesh, Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.9926 of 2026 PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No.545 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Sole Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.05.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 316(2), 318(4) and 351(3) of BNS and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, in Crime No.545 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner got jewels from the defacto complainant and thereafter, he did not return the same to her and when the defacto complainant asked the jewels, the petitioner threatened her with filthy language and also harassed her. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.9926 of 2026 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he seeks bail. 4.The learned Counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu (Crl. side) strongly opposed to grant bail on the ground that the petitioner got jewels from the defacto complainant and thereafter, he did not return the same to her and when the defacto complainant asked the jewels, the petitioner threatened her with filthy language and also harassed her. 5.Considering the nature and seriousness of the offences alleged and also taking note of the fact that the quantum of jewels involved in this case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, this petition is dismissed. (K M S J) 27.05.2026 SJI 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.9926 of 2026 K.MURALI SHANKAR,J SJI TO 1. The Inspector of Police, South Police Station, Thoothukudi. 2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.9926 of 2026 Date : 27/05/2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis