Arupadai Murugan v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Kamuthi

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 05.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL CRL OP(MD). No. 10276 of 2026 Arupadai Murugan

...Petitioner

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Kamuthi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.

(Crime No.104 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Vishnuram Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.G.Ganesh Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 104 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.04.2026, for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 49 & 103 of BNS @ 296(b), 115(2) and 103 of BNS, in Crime No.104 1/6

of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 24.02.2026 there was wordy altercation between the parties, due to which on the same day, the petitioner came to the defacto complainant's house and pulled and pushed the deceased and assaulted with bare hands. The deceased succumbed to the injuries. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he was falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. The deceased already undergone surgery for heart ailment. Moreover, the petitioner is having 70 % disability and cannot move without the help of the stick. The defacto complaint's daughter fell in love. The same was came to known to the petitioner. Hence, there was a wordy quarrel between them. Hence, he prayed bail for the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the offence are grave in nature. The petitioner pulled down the deceased and kicked in the chest portion. Due to which, he 2/6

sustained injuries. Therefore he died. The petitioner has two previous case, not similar in nature. Investigation is still pending. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

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, considering the nature of charges levelled against the petitioner, no weapons were used in this case, even according to the prosecution he pushed down the victim and kicked her on the chest, though the petitioner has two previous cases, they are not similar in nature and in that cases, he was granted bail and 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 petitioner is ordered to be 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, Kamuthi, and on further conditions that:

3/6

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police, daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders:

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he/she is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he/she is suspected;

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

[e] the petitioner 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 appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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) 05.06.2026 TM 4/6

To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Kamuthi.

2.The Inspector of Police, Kamuthi Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. (Crime No.104 of 2026) 3.The Superintendent, District Prison, Ramanathapuram. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

P. DHANABAL, J.

TM

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 10276 of 2026 Date : 05.06.2026 6/6