G Arumugasamy v. The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.3198 of 2026 G.Arumugasamy ... Petitioner Vs.

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, F-1, Chindaripet Police Station.

(Crime No.740 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Crime No. 740 of 2025 on the file of The Inspector of Police, F-1, Chindaripet Police Station and pass orders.

For Petitioner :

Ms.R.Priyanka For Respondent :

Ms. J.R. Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner herein apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) in Crime No.740 of 2025 on the file of the respondent, seek anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other accused, engaged hirelings to commit murder of the defacto complainant and paid a sum of Rs.95,000/- to them. It is further alleged that, on the date of occurrence, the petitioner and other accused attacked the defacto complainant with a knife and caused grievous injuries to him. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation and abide by any other stringent conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner, along with other accused, attacked the defacto complainant with a knife and caused grievous injuries to him. He further submitted that, upon enquiry, it was found that the petitioner and the other accused had engaged hirelings, by paying money, to commit murder of the defacto complainant. Hence he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/4

5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the submissions made on either side, the nature of the offence and the specific overt acts attributed to the petitioner in the alleged attempt to commit the murder of the defacto complainant, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 10.02.2026 kmm To

1. The Inspector of Police, F-1, Chindaripet Police Station.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

kmm Crl.O.P.No.3198 of 2026 11.02.2026 4/4