Pavendhiran v. The State Rep By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.32575 of 2025 Pavendhiran Petitioner Vs The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Mathur Police Station, Krishnagiri.

Crime No.420 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.420 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner: Mr.P.Thinesh For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 03.11.2025 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 191(2),

191(3), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3), 109 of BNS Act, in Crime No.420 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is ranked as A2. It is alleged that the petitioner joined hands with other accused attacked the defacto complainant using knife and other deadly weapons, causing indiscriminate cuts and severe injuries, for which the defacto complainant was admitted in the hospital. Hence, the case was registered against the petitioner and the petitioner was arrested.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant only with hands and the other accused attacked him with deadly weapons and that co-accused was released on bail before the Sessions Court. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are totally 11 accused in this case and the petitioner is ranked as A2. He further submitted that the petitioner is also actively participated in the alleged occurrence and attacked the defacto complainant and that four

previous cases of similar in nature are pending against him. Hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, though the injured was discharged from the hospital and that four previous cases are pending against him, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 04.12.2025 drl To 1.The Inspector of Police, Mathur Police Station, Krishnagiri.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J., drl CRL OP NO.32575 of 2025 04.12.2025