Selvam S v. The State Represented by the Inspector of Police

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

03.01.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 281, 125(a) and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.189 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner, who is the divorced husband of the defacto complainant, intentionally ran over the defacto complainant using his Maruti 800 car. It is further alleged that, after knocking her down, the petitioner reversed the vehicle and again drove over her, causing multiple grievous injuries. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner has been in custody since 03.01.2026 and is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for the grant of bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent, while opposing the grant of bail, reiterated the prosecution case and, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner is none other than the divorced husband of the defacto complainant. He would further submit that an earlier attempt had also been made by the petitioner to attack the defacto complainant using his two-wheeler. He also produced before this Court a copy of the First Information Report, wherein suspicion had initially been raised against the petitioner, and submitted that the vehicle involved in the occurrence admittedly stands in the name of the petitioner and belongs to him. The learned Government Advocate further produced the wound certificate of the defacto complainant, which discloses that she sustained as many as 17 injuries, out of which four are grievous in nature, and that she was admitted to the hospital on

19.06.2026 and discharged on 03.07.2026.

¶5Hence, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the seriousness of the allegations, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, namely, that the petitioner drove the car over the defacto complainant and thereafter reversed the vehicle and again drove over her, coupled with the nature of the injuries sustained by the defacto complainant, this Court is of the view that it would not be appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.

¶6Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

21.07.2026 skr C.KUMARAPPAN,J. skr To

¶1The learned Judicial Magistrate, Rasipuram

¶2The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem

¶3The Inspector of Police, Rasipuram Police Station, Namakkal District.

¶4The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras

21.07.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 21.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Selvam ... Petitioner(s) Vs. The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Rasipuram Police Station, Namakkal District. ... Respondent(s) Crime No.189 of 2026 PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.189 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s) : Mr.K.A.Mariappan For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.Yogaraj Sekar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)