Chandra v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Chandra

...Petitioner

Versus

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Gurubarapalli Police Station Krishnagiri District Crime No. 380 of 2025.

Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No. 380 of 2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Deepak Kumar For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.11.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 106(1), 61(2), 281, 103(1) of BNS, in Crime No.380 of 2025 on the file of respondent police, seeks bail.

1/4

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is ranked as A3 in this case. It is alleged that the deceased owned certain properties and with a view to obtain the insurance claim of the deceased, the accused staged a car accident by intentionally hitting the deceased with a car while he was on the road. The complaint was initially registered as an accident case. Subsequently, during the course of investigation, it was revealed that the occurrence was a pre-planned murder allegedly committed by A1 to A3. Hence, the complaint was lodged and the petitioners were arrested. 3.The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the name of the petitioner was not found in the FIR and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.

He further submitted that the petitioner has not involved in any other offences as alleged by the prosecution and he has been judicial custody since 21.11.2025. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner. 4.Mr.A.Gopinath, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that at the time of occurrence, A1 and A2 were in the car and after committing the murder of the deceased, a complaint was lodged projecting the incident as a motor accident.

committed the offence not only with the intention of usurping the property of the deceased but also to obtain insurance compensation. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

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

6.Considering the nature and gravity of offences, the motive behind the murder, and the fact that the act was allegedly committed not only a preplanned murder but also with the intention of obtaining huge money as compensation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 7.Accordingly, both the Criminal Original Petition shall stands dismissed.

28.01.2026 MSM To 1.The Inspector of Police, Gurubarapalli Police Station Krishnagiri District Crime No. 380 of 2025.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 3/4

K.RAJASEKAR J.

MSM Crl.O.P.No.1736 of 2026 28.01.2026 4/4