Gowtham v. The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI

1. Gowtham S/o.Sankar, Uthayampattu, Villiyanoo, Puducherry-60511

2. Pravin Kumar @ Pura Mandai S/o.Ravikumar, Uthayampattu, Villiyanoo, Puduchery-605 110

3. Vikaram S/o.Sankar, Uthayampattu, Villiyanoo, Puducherry-605 110 Petitioner(s) Vs The Inspector of Police Town Police station, Karaikal District Cr.No.192/2025 Respondent(s) 1/6

PRAYER To enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.192/2025 on the file of the respondent For Petitioner(s):

Mr. A.Samson For Respondent(s):

Mr.K.S.Mohandoss Public Prosecutor (Puducherry)

ORDER

The petitioners, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.07.2025 for the alleged offence under Section 103(1) BNS r/w 3(5) of BNS , 2023 in Crime No.192 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail.

2. The case of prosecution is that due to previous dispute, on 02.07.2025 around 02.30 hours, the deceased was sleeping in the back side of house, at that time the defacto complainant heard voice, wherein the petitioners said to have attacked the deceased with deadly weapons, as a result of which, he sustained serious injuries and died in the hospital. Accordingly, the complaint was registered against the petitioners.

3. The learned counsel appearing for petitioners submitted that there is no specific overtact attributed against the petitioners and they are no way 2/6

connected with the offence. He would submit that they have not at all committed any of offence as alleged by the respondent police and they have been falsely implicated in this case and they will abide by any condition that may be imposed by this court. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioners have been suffering incarceration for more than 68 days from 03.07.2025. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that with previous motive, the petitioners have planned and attacked the deceased on that day. He would submit that totally there are three accused involved in this case, in which the petitioners are arrayed as A1 to A3 and the 1 st petitioner/A1 is having one previous case pending. He would submit that that if they are released on bail, they would tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation and the investigation is almost completed. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.

5. On seeing the facts, it reveals that on the date of occurrence, the deceased was sleeping in the back side of house, at that time, the defacto complainant heard voice, wherein the petitioners have attacked the deceased with deadly weapons, as a result of which, he sustained serious injuries and died in the hospital. So, considering the gravity of offence committed by the 3/6

petitioners and also the fact that investigation is still pending and if they are released on bail, there is possibility of tampering the witnesses and hampering the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 10-09-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rpp To

1. Judicial Magistrate No.1, Karaikal.

2. The Inspector of Police, Town Police Station, Karaikal Dt.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. 4/6

5/6

T.V.THAMILSELVI J.

rpp CRL OP No. 24438 of 10-09-2025 6/6