Kabildev vs The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1915 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1915 Mad
Judgement Date : 16 April, 2026

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Kabildev vs The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector ... on 16 April, 2026

                                                                  CRL OP(MD). No. 7436 of 2026



                         BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                         ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

                                            Date   : 16.04.2026

                                                   PRESENT

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

                                       CRL OP(MD). No. 7436 of 2026


                     1.Kabildev

                     2.Sakthi Bala                 ...Petitioners/A1 & A2

                                                     Vs

                     State of Tamil Nadu rep. by
                     The Inspector of Police,
                     Thoothukudi South Police Station,
                     Thoothukudi District.
                     (Crime No.916 of 2025) ...Respondent/Complainant


                                     For Petitioners:Mr.S.Vishnuvardhan
                                     For Respondent:Mr.B.Nambi Selvan
                                               Additional Public Prosecutor

                                  PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS

                     PRAYER :-

                         For Bail in Cr.No. 916 of 2025 on the file of
                     the respondent police.




                     1/8




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                            CRL OP(MD). No. 7436 of 2026



                     ORDER :

The Court made the following order :-

The petitioners/A1 and A2, who were arrested

and remanded to judicial custody on 26.12.2025

for the offences punishable under Section 103(1)

of BNS, in Crime No.916 of 2025 on the file of

the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the

deceased is the son of the defacto complainant.

There is a dispute between the deceased and the

accused persons with regard to their friend's

death the deceased has also spoken about him

badly. Due to which, on 24.12.2025, the

petitioners and other accused persons conspired

together and murdered the deceased. Hence, the

case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners would submit that the petitioners are

innocent persons and they have not involved in

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

any offence as alleged in the FIR. There is no

specific overt act against the petitioners. They

are no way connected with the occurrence and they

were falsely implicated in this case. He would

further submit that the co-accused was already

granted bail by this Court. Therefore, he prayed

to grant bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor

appearing for the respondent would submit that

the due to the previous dispute with regard to

the death of his friend, the petitioners along

with other accused planned and surrounded the

deceased and took him to a far away place and

attacked him with aruval, due to which, the

deceased died on the spot. It is a retaliation

murder. Investigation in this case has been

completed and charge sheet also filed before the

Judicial Magistrate No.II, Thoothukudi and the

same was taken cognizance in P.R.C.No.69 of 2026

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

and pending for committal proceedings. The first

petitioner has 10 previous cases and the second

petitioner has two previous cases. Therefore, he

vehemently, opposed the grant of bail.

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, considering

the fact that the investigation has been

completed and charge sheet also filed before the

concerned Court and the same is pending for

committal proceedings, though the petitioners

have some previous cases, the same are not

similar kind of offences and in all cases, bail

was granted to them and also considering the fact

that the co-accused was already granted bail by

this Court and period of incarceration of the

petitioner from 26.12.2025, this Court is

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject

to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are

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, Thoothukudi District, and

on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report

before the Judicial Magistrate No.II,

Thoothukudi, daily at 10.30 a.m., on all

working days, until further orders;

[c] the petitioners 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;

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

[d] the petitioners shall not abscond

either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioners 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 petitioners

in accordance with law as if the

conditions have been imposed and the

petitioners 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].