CRL OP(MD). No.10154 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 04/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No.10154 of 2026 Yogeshwaran ... Petitioner/Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Dindigul Twon West Police Station, Dindigul District. Crime No.157 of 2026. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesan For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.157 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10154 of 2026 ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner/Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.04.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(1), 232, 352, 351(3) of BNS @ 126(1), 232(1), 352, 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.157 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had murdered the father of the defacto complainant, for which, the petitioner is facing trial before the Additional District Court, Dindigul in SC No. 152 of 2023. In this regard, on 26.04.2026 at about 05.00p.m., the petitioner wrongfully restrained the defacto complainant at Dindigul Nagar Murugavanam and threatened him with dire consequences if he were to adduce evidence against the petitioner in the said case. Hence, the complaint. 3. 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 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10154 of 2026 prosecution. He would further submit that it is alleged that the occurrence took place on 26.04.2026, but the FIR was registered only on 29.04.2026. The defacto complainant has also adduced evidence against me before the Additional District Court, Dindigul in SC No.152 of 2023. The petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.04.2026. Therefore, prayed to grant bail for the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that based on the complaint lodged by the defacto complainant, the case has been registered against the accused. The petitioner has previous cases at his credit. He would further submit that the investigation is pending and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. 5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6.Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the nature of the offence, according to the FIR, 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10154 of 2026 the occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 26.05.2026, whereas the complaint was lodged by the defacto complainant only on 29.05.2026, indicating a delay in the registration of the FIR, and further considering the fact that, though the petitioner has previous cases to his credit, he has already been granted bail in those cases, that the defacto complainant has also adduced evidence before the trial Court, and that the petitioner has undergone a long period of incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: [a] Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and 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.I, Dindigul, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police at 10.30 a.m., for a period of thirty 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 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10154 of 2026 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. (P D B J) 04.06.2026 PNM 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10154 of 2026 TO 1. The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul. 2. Do-Through The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dindugal District. 3. The Superintendent, District Prison, Dindigul. 4. The Inspector of Police, Dindigul Town West Police Station, Dindigul District. 5. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.10154 of 2026 P. DHANABAL,J PNM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.10154 of 2026 Date : 04/06/2026 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis