Murugesan v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

1. Murugesan

2. Nagaraj ..Petitioner Vs State by, the Inspector of Police, Hogenakkal Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

Crime No.137 of 2025 ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail as against the case pending on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pennagaram in PRC No.5/2026.

For Petitioner:

Mr.D.Thirumoorthy For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 10.12.2025 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 194 of BNS Act 2023 @ 103(1) of BNS Act, 2023 in Crime No.137 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.12.2025 an unknown body was found in the Kavery river bed and based on the complaint given by the

Village Administrative Officer, a case was initially registered as suspicious death and later altered. During investigation, the present petitioners were implicated in the case and arrested.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that initially the petitioners were not named as accused and only during the course of investigation they have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is also submitted that the third accused has already been enlarged on bail in Crl.O.P.No.4611 of 2026 dated 25.02.2026. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent strongly opposed the bail application on the ground that both the petitioners are history sheeters. According to him, the first petitioner has ten previous criminal cases and the second petitioner has sixteen previous criminal cases. He would further submit that if the petitioners are enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of tampering with evidence and influencing the witnesses. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

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, this Court is of the view that the previous criminal history of the petitioners shows that if they are released on bail, it may cause difficulty to the witnesses and affect the course of investigation. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 12-03-2026 NSL To

1. The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pennagaram.

2. District Jail, Dharmapuri.

3. The Inspector of Police, Hogenakkal Police Station, Dharmapuri District.

4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 12-03-2026