Santhi vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2639 Mad

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 2639 Mad
Judgement Date : 20 May, 2026

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Santhi vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of ... on 20 May, 2026

Author: R.Vijayakumar

Bench: R.Vijayakumar

                                                                                  CRL OP(MD). No.9432 of 2026


                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                      ( Criminal Jurisdiction )

                                                        Date : 20/05/2026

                                                            PRESENT

                                   The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

                                                   CRL OP(MD). No.9432 of 2026


                     Santhi                                             ... Petitioner/Accused

                                                                Vs

                     The State of Tamilnadu represented by
                     The Inspector of Police,
                     SIPCOT Police Station,
                     Thoothukudi District.
                     (Crime No.330 of 2026)                             ... Respondent/Complainant


                                  For Petitioner    : Mr.S.Deepaksiva

                                  For Respondent : Mr.A.Albert James,
                                                   Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

                                  For Intervenor : Mr.Mohammed Yunnis

                           PETITION FOR ANTICIBATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS

                     PRAYER :-

                                  For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.330/2026 on the file of the

                     respondent Police.

                     1/6




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                              CRL OP(MD). No.9432 of 2026


                     ORDER :

The Court made the following order :-

The petitioner / accused, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the

respondent police for the offence punishable under Section 305(a) of

BNS, in Crime No.330 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks

anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is

residing in a house belongs to the petitioner and that on 20.04.2026, the

defacto complainant, on suspecting that the petitioner had stolen a gold

chain from her grand daughter, lodged a complaint. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit

that the petitioner is innocent and she has not committed any offence as

alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail to the

petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing

for the respondent police would submit that the property was not

recovered and the investigation is pending and that the petitioner is not

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

having any previous cases. Therefore, he opposed for grant of

anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the defacto complainant

would submit that the gold chain worth about Rs.40,000/- was not

recovered.

6. Considering the nature of the allegations levelled against the

petitioner and also the fact that the petitioner is not having any previous

cases, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner

subject to certain conditions.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in

the event of arrest or on her appearance, on condition that the petitioner

shall 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, Thoothukudi, within a period of

fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on further

conditions that:

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

[a]the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or bank pass book to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police once in a month i.e., on the first day of every English calendar month at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c]the petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d]the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e]On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned 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 is 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];