M.Karthik v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.28676 of 2025 M.Karthik Petitioner Vs The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Banavaram Police Station, Ranipet District - 632 505.

Crime No.179 of 2025. Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.179 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.L.Ramkumar For Respondent(s):

Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.side)

ORDER

The petitioner who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b) and 103(1) of BNS, 2023 @ under Sections 61(2), 126(2), 296(b), and 103(1) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.179 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is ranked as A5. It is alleged that A1 had previous enmity with the deceased in this case for the reason that the deceased was the root cause for separation of A1's wife and was also a cause for the trouble in the matrimonial life. A1 conspired with A7 and accordingly A7 paid a sum of Rs.20 lakhs through A5 for the purpose of murdering the deceased. Accordingly, the petitioner engaged A4, who is his henchman and A1 to A4 went to the place of occurrence, waylaid the deceased and attacked him with deadly weapons and caused his murder. Subsequent to the arrest of A1 it revealed that the petitioner has contributed a sum of Rs.20 lakhs for committing murder of the deceased in this case. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner is alleged to have engaged by A1 & A7 for murdering the deceased, this Court has already granted bail to A7 in Crl.OP.No.27039 of 2025. He further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is not substantiated by any material evidence, and that the final report was filed, the petitioner is in judicial custody from 26.06.2025. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that there totally seven accused in this case, and the petitioner is arrayed as A5. He further submitted that A7 in this case was granted bail on the ground that she is a woman and her role was limited to participating in the conspiracy along with A1. He further submitted that the present petitioner, who is said to have had a close relationship with A1, collected a sum of Rs. 20 lakhs from A1 and A7, and engaged A2 to A4, who are alleged to be hired killers, to commit the murder of the deceased. He also submitted that the final report has been filed, and the witnesses who speak about the transfer of money between the petitioner and the other accused have been included. He further

submitted that the specific charge against the petitioner is that she engaged the accused and made the payment of money for the commission of the offence. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. I have considered the earlier order, granting bail in favour of A7, the overt act attributed to the present petitioner and it is specifically stated that the petitioner had collected a huge sum of money from A1 and A7 for the purpose of committing the murder, and that he, in turn, engaged the other accused who are hirelings to carry out the offence at his instance. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 22-10-2025 drl To 1.The Inspector of Police, Banavaram Police Station, Ranipet District - 632 505.

2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.,

drl CRL OP NO.28676 of 2025 22.10.2025