Arun v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 22.06.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Arun

...Petitioner/Accused

Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police, Silaiman Police Station Madurai District (Crime No. 154 of 2026)

...Respondent/Complainant

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mohamed Rafi For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of Tamil Nadu (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Crime No.154 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police ORDER : The Court made the following order :- 1/5

The petitioner / A6, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.05.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 194 of BNSS @ 103(1) of BNS @ 190, 191(2), 191(3), 140(1) and 103(1) of BNS Act in Crime No.154 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant is the VAO of Puliyangulam Village, who found the dead body of the deceased near Puliyangulam and lodged the complaint. The investigation reveals that the deceased was mentally unstable and frequently subjected to mother of A1 to sexual harassment and abused. Unable to endure this any longer on 09.05.2026 the accused persons brutally assaulted the deceased with stones resulting in his death. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent police has registered a false case against the petitioner and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He would further submit that the petitioner has been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.05.2025. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner. 2/5

4. The learned Government Advocate(Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the accused persons has brutally assaulted the deceased and caused his death. He would further submit that the investigation is pending. Hence, he opposed to grant 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 and considering the nature of offences and also the fact that the investigation is in initial stage and the offences are grave in nature and thereby this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Hence the petition stands dismissed.

(P D B J) 22.06.2026 aav 3/5

To 1.The Sub Inspector of Police, Silaiman Police Station Madurai District 2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 11829 of 2026 Date : 22.06.2026 5/5