Aravind @ Appu v. The State Rep By Sub Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09.01.2026 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.570 of 2026 Aravind @ Appu ... Petitioner -vsState Rep by, The Sub Inspector of Police, Banavaram Police Station, Ranipet District.

(Crime No.179 of 2025) ... Respondent Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.179 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner :

Mr.J.Prakasam For Respondent :

Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side) *********

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.06.2025, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 103(1), 61(2), 49 of BNS Act, 2023 in Crime No.179 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks bail.

1/4

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is a hireling engaged by A1 to A7. It is alleged that A1 and A7 were having an illicit relationship and, when the same was questioned by the deceased, A1 to A7 engaged A2 to A5 as hirelings by paying a sum of Rs.10 lakhs. In pursuance of the said conspiracy, while the deceased was travelling alone, he was intercepted and attacked indiscriminately with knife, resulting in his death. Hence, a case was registered and the petitioner was arrested.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ranked as A4 in this case and that the co-accused, namely A7 has been granted bail by this Court in Crl.OP.No.27039 of 2025. He further submitted that A7 is alleged to have only instigated the commission of the offence. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are totally seven accused in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A4. He further submitted that A7 alone was granted bail by this Court, since she is a lady and did not participate in attacking the deceased, whereas, this petitioner is one of the main accused who directly participated in the commission of the offence. He further submitted that the bail petition filed by A2 was dismissed by this Court in Crl.OP.No.34488 of 2025, after the investigation was completed and the final 2/4

report was filed. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.

6. This Court on perusal of the orders passed by this Court in Crl.OP.No.27039 of 2025 (A7) and Crl.OP.No.34488 of 2025 (A2), it is evident that bail was granted to A7 considering her role and status, whereas bail was rejected to A2 in view of the serious nature of the allegations. In the present case, the allegation is that the petitioner is one of the hirelings engaged for committing the murder of the deceased. Though it is stated that the petitioner has no previous case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 09.01.2026 drl To 1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Banavaram Police Station, Ranipet District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3/4

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

drl Crl.O.P.No.570 of 2026 09.01.2026 4/4