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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 23.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR Prasanth ... Petitioner/A5 Vs.

State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Thiruttani Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

(Crime No.286 of 2025).

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in Crime No.286 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.M.D.Ilayaraja For Respondent : Mr.R.Vinothraja Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 1/4

329(4), 296(b) and 103 of BNS, 2023 (Sections 147, 148, 427, 294(b) and 302 of I.P.C.) in connection with the case in Crime No.286 of 2025, seeks bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that there was a quarrel between the de-facto complainant and the accused persons in establishment of meat shop, which was questioned by the uncle of the de-facto complainant. On 02.06.2025, at about 8.00 p.m., when the de-facto complainant and his uncle were sleeping in the house, the petitioner along with other accused trespassed into the de-facto complainant's house and attacked them. The de-facto complainant escaped from the spot, whereas they started to assault the defacto complainant's uncle with wooden reaper and knife, due to which, the skull of the de-facto complainant's uncle broken and he died on the spot. Hence, the case.

3.The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person. There was previous enmity between the petitioner and the de-facto complainant in establishing the beef shop. Due to which, a false 2/4

complaint has been lodged against the petitioner. Based on the confession statement of co-accused, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent strongly opposed the petitioner's contention submitting that the de-facto complainant rented out his shop to one Arun. There was previous enmity between A1/Surya and Arun. On 01.06.2025, A1 came to the shop of the de-facto complainant's tenant and asked to vacate the shop. At that time, de-facto complainant's uncle Ravi went there and chased A1 away. On this motive, on 02.06.2025, initially attempt was made to attack the de-facto complainant but he escaped from the spot. Hence, the petitioner along with other accused trespassed into the de-facto complainant's uncle's house and attacked him with knife and committed murder. In this case all the accused were arrested and they are in jail.

3/4

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

rsi 5.Considering the grave nature of offence, this Court is not inclined to entertain this petition and the same is dismissed. 23.07.2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rsi To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Thiruttani.

2.The Inspector of Police, Thiruttani Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai - 600 104.

4/4