S.Rajamani & Anr. vs The State

The Petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.08.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3), and 109 BNS @ 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Sections 294(b), 323, 324, 506 and 307 IPC @ 155, 156, 294(b), 323, 324, 506 and 302 of Indian Penal Code respectively), in Crime No.90 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of the proseuction is that, due to a land dispute, on 02.08.2026 at about 08.00p.m., when the de-facto complainant was at his land along with his family members, the petitioners came there, abused him in filthy language, assaulted his father with a stone on his stomach, and threatend them with dire consequences. The injured was taken for medical treatment; however, despite medical intervention, he subsequently succumbed to his injuries. Hence, the case.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since 02.08.2026. He also further submitted that the co-accused (A3, A5 and A7) have already been granted bail and the petitioners are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioners.

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) stronlgy opposed the bail petition, submitting that the petitioners assaulted the father of the de-facto complainant with a stone due to a land dispute, resulting in his death despite medical treatment. He further submitted that the investigation is almost completed. Hence, he sought dismissal of the bail petition.

I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the nature of the dispute, the motive, the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, and the fact that the investigation has been completed, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioners, subject to the following conditions:

Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their executing a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- each (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Thiruvannamalai, and on further conditions that:

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the identity proofs to ensure their identity;

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[e] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioners in acc with law as if the aforementioned 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)13 SCC 283];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.