Udhaya @ Udhayakumar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Anna Nagar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 17.04.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL 1.Udhaya @ Udhayakumar 2.Vicky @ Vigneshkumar

...Petitioners/Accused-9, 10

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Anna nagar Police Station Madurai.

(Crime No. 96 of 2026 )

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioners : Mr.P.Shiva Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan Additional Public Prosecutor PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 96 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/7

The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 127(2), 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1), 109 of BNS @ 127(2), 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1) & 103(1) of BNS, in Crime No.96 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the complainant is the wife of the deceased. The deceased was running a business in the name of 'Thai Store' at Andalpuram and also indulged in a broker business and car hiring etc., In such circumstances, the deceased along with his friends has hired a car from A4 and subsequently, it was mortgaged by the deceased with A1. On knowing the same, the owner of the vehicle, A4 and his friends called the deceased and his friends for compromise talk on 11.02.2026 and at that time, there was some wordy altercation between them. At that time, the petitioner and the other accused are said to have brutally attacked the deceased with a wooden log and their hands and caused multiple injuries all over the body. Immediately, he was taken to the Muthukulathur Government Hospital, and thereafter, shifted to 2/7

Ramanathapuram Government Hospital for further treatment on 13.02.2026 and in the hospital, he died on 18.02.2026. Hence, the respondent police registered a case against the accused for the aforesaid offences and arrested the petitioner. Hence, this petition.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are innocent and they were falsely implicated in this case and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the alleged attack was only made by A1, A2 & A3, and they have no previous case and they have been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.02.2026. He would further submit that A1, A2, A4, A7 and A8 were also granted bail by this Court. Therefore, he prayed to grant bail for the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that there are totally 12 accused are involved in this case. The petitioners have been arrayed as A9 and A10. The petitioners are the friends of A1. The deceased hired a car from A4 and subsequently, mortgaged the same with A1 without the knowledge of A4. 3/7

In that dispute, the accused are brutally attacked the deceased and caused death to him. He would further submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioners. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and the offences are grave in nature and hence, he opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and considering the facts that the petitioners are only the friends of A1 and the investigation is almost completed, and no previous case is pending against the petitioner and also some of the co-accused were granted bail by this Court and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be 4/7

released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-VI, Madurai, and on further conditions that: [b] the petitioners shall report before the learned Judicial Magistrate-VI, Madurai on all working days at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioners shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which they are suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take 5/7

appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

(P D B J) 17.04.2026 apd To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-VI, Madurai.

2.The Inspector of Police, Anna nagar Police Station Madurai.

3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Madurai. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

6/7

P. DHANABAL, J apd

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 7470 of 2026 Date : 17.04.2026 7/7