Yuvaraj v. The State Rep.By, the Inspector of Police,

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

25.06.2025 for the alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 103(1), 61(2) and 49 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS Act), 2023, which equivalent to 341, 294(b), 302, 120B and 109 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, in Crime No.179 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail. Page2 of 4

¶2The case of the prosecution is that, the deceased Balakrishnan, who is the husband of the defacto complainant, had developed an illegal intimacy with the wife of petitioner. Due to which, a matrimonial dispute arose between the petitioner and his wife. Being enraged over the same, the petitioner allegedly conspired with the other accused, assaulted the deceased and committed his murder. Hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.06.2025 and he has been in prison for more than 250 days. It is further submitted that investigation has already been completed and final report/charge sheet has been filed and the case is now pending in S.C.No.4 of 2026. Therefore, the further custody of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he seeks to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that totally seven accused are involved in this case and the petitioner is arrayed as accused No.1. Accordingly to the prosecution, the petitioner along with the other accused, brutally murdered the deceased Page3 of 4 Balakrishnan. He further submitted that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is every possibility of tampering with the witnesses and hampering the trial. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶5I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

¶6From the submission of the learned counsel on either side, it is seen that the petitioner is arrayed as A1 in this case and there are totally seven accused involved in this occurrence. The allegation against the petitioner is that due to the alleged illegal intimacy between the deceased and the wife of the petitioner, the petitioner along with the other accused, conspired and brutally murdered the deceased.

¶7This Court is of the view that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. Considering the nature of the offence, the manner in which the occurrence had taken place and the possibility of tampering the witnesses, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶8Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 06-03-2026 NSL Page4 of 4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J. NSL To

¶1The Inspector of Police, Banavaram Police Station, Ranipet District.

¶2The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 06-03-2026

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Yuvaraj ..Petitioner Vs The State, represented by the Inspector of Police, Banavaram Police Station, Ranipet District. Crime No. 179 of 2025. ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in Crime No.179 of 2025 (Now S.C.No.4 of 2026). For Petitioner: Mr.J.Sreeram Bullappan For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)