J Arul Albert v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR J. Arul Albert ... 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, 2023, 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 :

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

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that only based on the confession statement given by the co-accused this petitioner has been implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he is ready to cooperate 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 petitioners joined hands with other accused and attacked the defacto complainant with knife and caused grievous injuries to him. He further submitted on enquiry it is found that the petitioner and other accused engaged hirelings 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 by both sides and the nature of offence; the vital role played by the petitioner 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 smn To 1.The Inspector of Police, F-1, Chindaripet Police Station, 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

smn 10.02.2026 4/4