Jegadeesan Vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

The case of the prosecution is that due to prior property dispute between the defacto complainant's husband and his brother, there was previous enmity between them. On 03.04.2026, a wordy quarrel arose, during which, the accused persons attacked the defacto complainant's husband and abused him in filthy language. On coming to know the incident, the defacto complainant went to the place of occurrence and found her husband injured. She taken him to the hospital. But, he died. Hence, the case.

¶27

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. Due to the property dispute, both parties assaulted each other. Co-accused were released on bail. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

¶28

The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The petitioner only brutally attacked the deceased. The petitioner has no previous case against him. Investigation in this case is still pending. Hence, he opposed the grant of

¶29

2/6

¶30

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

¶31

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11331 of 2026

¶32

bail to the petitioner.

¶33

This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶34

Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, there was already property dispute between the parties, already co-accused was granted anticipatory bail, the petitioner has no previous case 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:

¶35

[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, Thiruvaiyaru, Thanjavur District , and on further conditions that:

¶36

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders:

¶37

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the

¶38

3/6

¶39

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

¶40

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11331 of 2026

¶41

commission of which he/she is suspected;

¶42

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

¶43

[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;

¶44

[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

¶45

Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

¶46

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

(P D B J) 17.06.2026

TM

To