M.G.Ramachandiran v. State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN M.G.Ramachandhiran ..Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Banavaram Police Station, Ranipet District.

Crime No. 179 of 2025.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in Crime No.179 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner:

Mr.M.S.Sriram For Respondent:

Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 27.06.2025 for the alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 103(1), 61(2) and 49 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.179 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, the deceased Balakrishnan, who is the husband of the defacto complainant had developed an illegal intimacy with

the wife of A1 and that there arose a matrimonial dispute between the A1 and his wife. Thereafter, A1 got enraged and conspired with other accused, paid a sum of Rs.20 lakhs to the petitioner herein, who is alleged to be a gang leader to murder the said Balakrishnan and that the petitioner along with other accused had assaulted and committed murder of the deceased. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no specific overt act attributed against the petitioner and that the petitioner is innocent and he has nothing to do with the alleged occurrence. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 27.06.2025 and he is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there was totally seven accused involved in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2 in this case. The specific overact of the petitioner herein is that he was the leader of the gang hired for murdering the deceased for money. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) further submitted that A2 is involved in other criminal cases, namely one murder case, one case under the NDPS Act and another case under Section 307 Indian Penal

Code, 1860 and that he is a history-sheeter.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. From the submission of the learned counsel on either side, it is seen that one murder case, one case under the NDPS Act and another case under Section 307 Indian Penal Code, 1860 are pending against the petitioner. Hence, this Court is of the view that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. It prima facie appears that the accused persons conspired and committed the murder of the deceased.

7. Further, considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and the possibility of tampering with evidence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 06-03-2026 NSL To

1. The Inspector of Police, Banavaram Police Station, Ranipet District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 06-03-2026