M.Sanjay v. The State Rep by the Inspector of Police

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

27.06.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 332(a), 296(b), 118(1) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.411 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶2It is the case of the prosecution that, due to previous enmity, the petitioner, along with the other accused, trespassed into the house of the deceased and attacked him indiscriminately with knives, thereby causing his death. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is only 18 years of age. He would further submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He would also submit that the petitioner has been in custody since 27.06.2026 and that, in any event, his further custody is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of bail, reiterated the prosecution case and, on instructions, submitted that though the petitioner has no previous criminal antecedents, the manner in which the offence was committed is extremely brutal and gruesome. He would submit that the petitioner indiscriminately attacked the deceased with a knife and inflicted severe injuries on his head, resulting in the brain matter protruding out. He further submitted that the investigation is still pending and that, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of his tampering with witnesses.

¶5Though the petitioner is only 18 years of age and has no previous criminal antecedents, considering the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that the investigation is still pending, the gravity of the allegations, the brutal manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, particularly the indiscriminate attack with deadly weapons resulting in fatal head injuries, and having regard to the nature of the accusations, this Court is of the considered view that it would not be appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage.

¶6Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

24.07.2026 skr To

¶1The learned X Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai

¶2The Superintendent, Central Prison, Puzhal

¶3The Inspector of Police, P6 Kodungaiyur Police Station, Chennai.

¶4The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras C.KUMARAPPAN,J. skr

24.07.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 24.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN M.Sanjay ... Petitioner(s) Vs. The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, P6 Kodungaiyur Police Station, Chennai. ... Respondent(s) Crime No.411 of 2026 PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.411 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s) : Mr.B.Periyannan For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.Yogaraj Sekar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)