Hari @ Hariharan @ Haridass v. The State Rep. by Its Inspector of Police

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

07.02.2026 for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, read with Section 3(5) of BNS, in Crime No.25 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. Page2 of 4

¶2The case of the prosecution is that a wordy quarrel ensued between the accused (A1 to A4) and the deceased. It is alleged that the deceased, who was already present at the scene, intervened in the altercation, following which he was attacked and sustained grievous injuries. He subsequently succumbed to his injuries, leading to the registration of the present case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner merely attempted to pacify the quarrel between the other accused and the victim at a TASMAC shop. He contends that the petitioner is a stranger to the incident and has been arrayed as the fourth accused (A4) solely due to his presence at the scene. The petitioner was arrested on 07.02.2026 and has been in judicial custody since. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) appearing for the respondent, while opposing the grant of bail, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that accused persons, including the petitioner, brutally assaulted the victim following a quarrel at a liquor shop. It is further submitted that the victim was stabbed in the forehead with a motorcycle key and repeatedly assaulted by hand. The victim later died in the hospital. The learned Public Prosecutor further submits that the investigation is still at a nascent stage and, if released on bail, the petitioner may tamper with evidence or abscond. Page3 of 4

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

¶6Considering the gravity and serious nature of the allegations, particularly the brutal manner in which the victim was allegedly murdered, and taking into account the submission of the learned Public Prosecutor that the investigation is still at a nascent stage, this Court is of the view that it would not be appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

¶7Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 30-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Jeni To

1.The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Vanur.

2.The Principal Sessions Court, Puducherry.

3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Kalapet, Puducherry.

4.The Inspector of Police, Dhanvanthri Nagar Police Station, Puducherry-605 006.

5.The Public Prosecutor (Puducherry), High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o8045oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. Jeni CRLoOPoNo.o8045oofo2026 30-03-2026 Page4oofo4

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Hari @ Hariharan @ Haridass ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by its Inspector of Police Dhanvanthri Nagar Police Station, Puducherry-605 006. Cr. No.25/2026 ..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner/3rd Accused on bail in FIR Crime No.25 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): Mr.E.Lenin For Respondent(s): Mr.M.V.Ramachandra Murthy Public Prosecutor [Puducherry]