Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 13840 of 2026 1.S.Vimal Raj 2.Jeyabalachandran ...Petitioners Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Rajathani Police Station, Theni District. (Crime No.282 of 2025) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew Advocate For Respondent : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 282 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-The Petitioners / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.06.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 of IPC, in Crime No.282 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 seek bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are involved in fabrication of insurance policy as if it was issued for three wheeler, auto, and vehicle met with accident which resulted in filing of MCOP claim. On verification, the same was found out and the case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioners are in custody from 04.06.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. He would further submit that the documents pertaining to the insurance policy also have been seized by the police and further incarceration is not necessary for the purpose of investigation. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioners. 4. The learned Counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution case and reported that both the accused have some previous cases, but not similar in nature. Investigation in this case is still pending. He opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offences, the documents were also seized though the petitioners have some previous case, they are not similar in nature and considering the period of incarceration and I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject to certain conditions.

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Andipatti, Theni District, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks; [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; [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 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 51730]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(K R S J) 10.07.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Andipatti, Theni District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Rajathani Police Station, Theni District. (Crime No.282 of 2025) 3.The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Thekkampatty, Theni. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 K. RAJASEKAR, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 13840 of 2026 Date : 10.07.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 10.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 13840 of 2026 1.S.Vimal Raj 2.Jeyabalachandran ...Petitioners Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Rajathani Police Station, Theni District. (Crime No.282 of 2025) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioners : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew Advocate For Respondent : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 282 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :-The Petitioners / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.06.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471 of IPC, in Crime No.282 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 seek bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners are involved in fabrication of insurance policy as if it was issued for three wheeler, auto, and vehicle met with accident which resulted in filing of MCOP claim. On verification, the same was found out and the case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioners are in custody from 04.06.2026 and ready to abide any condition imposed by this Court. He would further submit that the documents pertaining to the insurance policy also have been seized by the police and further incarceration is not necessary for the purpose of investigation. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioners. 4. The learned Counsel appearing for the State reiterated the prosecution case and reported that both the accused have some previous cases, but not similar in nature. Investigation in this case is still pending. He opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offences, the documents were also seized though the petitioners have some previous case, they are not similar in nature and considering the period of incarceration and I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject to certain conditions.

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Andipatti, Theni District, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall appear before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of three weeks; [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; [d] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 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 51730]. [g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(K R S J) 10.07.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Andipatti, Theni District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Rajathani Police Station, Theni District. (Crime No.282 of 2025) 3.The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Thekkampatty, Theni. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13840 of 2026 K. RAJASEKAR, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 13840 of 2026 Date : 10.07.2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis