Logesh v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Melattur

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 30/06/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR

1. Logesh, S/o.Murugesan, No.2/347a, Kannithoppu, Papanasam Taluk, Thanjavur District..

2. Ramalingam, S/o.Durairaj, No.335,Athidravidar Street, Kannithoppu, Papanasam Taluk, Thanjavur District..

3. Karuppaiyan, S/o.Amudhan., No.1/80b,Keelapathi Athidravidar Street, Pulavarnaththam, Papanasam Taluk, Thanjavur District..

... Petitioners/A2 to A4 Vs 1/7

State of Tamilnadu Rep by, The Inspector of Police, Melattur Police Station, Thanjavur District, Crime No.93/2026.

... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.R.L.Dilipan Pandian for M. Ragul, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian, Counsel for State of TN (Crl.Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- C-6B.For Bail in Crime No.93/2026 on the file of the respondent police ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioners/A2 to A4, who were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.04.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 333 and 103(1) of BNS, 2023 @ Sections 103(1), 191(2), 191(3), 319(2), 333, 49 and 61(2)(a) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No. 93 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail. 2.The allegation against the petitioners is that they along with the associates of A1 in this case, engaged hirelings and committed the 2/7

murder of one Ajithkumar. It is further alleged that A1 engaged the petitioners herein, and after the commission of the murder, arranged for a false surrender as if the petitioners had committed the murder along with A1. The confession statement of A2 revealed that A1 along with the other accused engaged hirelings to commit the murder and falsely made the petitioners surrender before the police with a view to screen the offence. Hence, the case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are working under A1. They went to the police station when A1 was arrested by the police and the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case as if they surrendered before the police with a false statement admitting that they had committed the murder of the deceased. He would further submit that the petitioners have been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 26.04.2026 and no previous case is pending against the petitioners. Therefore, he prayed to grant bail for the petitioners.

3/7

4. The learned counsel for state of TN (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that totally there are 10 accused in this case and the petitioners are ranked as A2 to A4 and they were arrested and remanded to judicial custody, out of which, some of the accused detained under Act 14, 1982. He would further submit that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioners.

5. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. It was revealed that the petitioners along with the other accused, falsely surrendered before the respondent police as if they committed the murder of the deceased, with the intention of helping A1, who had engaged hirelings to commit the offence.

6. Considering the above said facts and the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, nature of offence, and the petitioners have no previous cases and they have not attacked the deceased and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners from 26.04.2026, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners subject to the following conditions: 4/7

[a] Accordingly, this petition is ordered and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Thanjavur, and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent Police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.; [c] the petitioners 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 petitioners 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 5/7

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 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.

(K R S J) 30.06.2026 VSG TO 1.The learned Judicial Magistrate Court No.III, Thanjavur.

2. The Officer-in-Charge, Sub Jail, Thanjavur. 3.The Inspector of Police, Melattur Police Station, Thanjavur District,

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

6/7

K. RAJASEKAR,J., vsg

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.12525 of 2026 Date : 30/06/2026 7/7