Aravind @ Appu v. The State Rep by Sub Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

26.06.2025, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 103(1), 61(2), 49 of BNS Act 2023, in Crime No.179 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

2.The allegation against the petitioner is that he is a hireling engaged by A1 to A7. It is alleged that A1 and A7 were having an illicit relationship and, when the same was questioned by the deceased, A1 and A7 engaged A2 to A5 as hirelings by paying a sum of Rs.10 lakhs. In pursuance of the said conspiracy, while the deceased was travelling alone, he was intercepted and attacked indiscriminately with knife, resulting in his death. Hence, a case was registered and the petitioner was arrested.

¶2Earlier, this Court dismissed the bail petition filed by the petitioner in Crl.OP.No.570 of 2026 by order dated 09.01.2026 on the following conditions: "6.This Court on perusal of the orders passed by this Court in Crl OP No.27039 of 2025 (A7) considering her role and status, whereas bail was rejected to A2 in view of the serious nature of the allegations. In the present case, the allegation is that the petitioner is one of the hirelings engaged for committing the murder of the deceased. Though it is stated that the petitioner has no previous case, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed."

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, after the dismissal of the earlier bail application, one of the co-accused was granted bail by this Court vide order dated 19.12.2025 in Crl OP No.34282 of 2025. Hence, there is a change in circumstances, as the co-accused has been released on bail. Therefore, he prays that bail be granted to the petitioner.

¶4This Court has perused the orders passed while granting bail to one of the co-accused, namely M.Karthik. It is revealed that the said M.Karthik assisted the other accused in committing the murder and was not directly involved in attacking the deceased. He also had no previous cases, and therefore, he was granted bail. However, insofar as the present petitioner is concerned, he was directly involved in committing the murder and is one of the hired assailants engaged by the other accused for a payment of Rs.20 lakhs. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶5Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

11.02.2026 gbi To

1.State rep.by, The Sub Inspector of Police, Banavaram Police Station, Ranipet District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. K.RAJASEKAR J. gbi CRL OP No. 3316 of 2026

11.02.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP No.3316 of 2026 Aravind @ Appu Petitioner(s) Vs State rep.by, The Sub Inspector of Police, Banavaram Police Station, Ranipet District. Cr.No.179 of 2025. Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail, concerned in PRC No.47 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s): M/s.J.Prakasam For Respondent(s): Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)