Shaik Ahammed Basha v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14-11-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.31056 of 2025 Shaik Ahammed Basha ... Petitioner/ Accused Vs The State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, T-22 Medavakkam Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.86 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail to the petitioner/accused in Crime No.86 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s) :

Mr. D. Raja For Respondent(s) :

Mr. A. Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side) ******* 1/4

ORDER

The petitioner herein, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.09.2025 for the offences punishable under Section 103(3) and 238(a) of BNS in Crime No.86 of 2025, seeks bail. 2.

The case of the prosecution is that, initially the case was registered as man missing based on the complaint given by the defacto complainant, who is the father of the deceased; that upon investigation, it is revealed that the petitioner herein, on account of previous enmity joined hands with other accused abducted the deceased from Chennai and took him to a forest area on the way to Kalahasti, video recorded various statements from the deceased and subsequently, murdered him by brutally attacking using beer bottles and knife; that thereafter set fire to his body and thrown the corpse into the Telugu Ganga canal; that thereafter, circulated the video recordings among other accused persons from the phone of the deceased. Hence, this case.

2/4

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that initially a man missing complaint was lodged by the defacto complainant and subsequently, it was altered into abduction and murder of the deceased, based on the statement recorded from one of the prisoners, who has over heard the conversation between some of the accused; that thereby the petitioner herein has been falsely implicated in this case and he is in judicial custody since 05.09.2025; and that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court, hence sought for bail to the petitioner.

4.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are totally three accused involved in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as A2; that the petitioner along with other accused murdered the deceased and in order to screen the offence, set fired the body of the deceased and thrown the corpse into a water canal; that the body of the deceased was not yet found; that the investigation of the case is at preliminary stage and the case is likely to be transferred to the file of Andhra Pradesh police for further investigation. 3/4

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

stn 5.

Considering the facts of the case, gravity of offence, the manner in which the offence is said to have taken place, taking note of the fact that the investigation of the case is at preliminary stage and the case is likely to be transferred to the file of Andhra Pradesh Police, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 6.

Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 14.11.2025 stn To

1. The Inspector of Police, T-22 Medavakkam Police Station, Chennai.

(Crime No.86 of 2025)

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

CRL OP NO.31056 of 2025 4/4