Disposed

Nandhakumar v. The State Rep by

Madras HC14 Nov 2025CRL OP/31077/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Murder bail petition for a petitioner in custody since arrest for allegedly attacking an elderly woman who died; investigation complete and final report filed. Considering incarceration period, the High Court granted conditional regular bail.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner ordered released on bail: bond Rs.20,000 with two like sureties before DMJM Arcot, identity-verified sureties, daily reporting at 10:30 a.m. for three weeks, breach handled per P.K. Shaji c

Nandhakumar Vs The State Rep by — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.31077 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 14-11-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR

¶6

CRL OP NO.31077 of 2025

¶7

Nandhakumar

¶8

... Petitioner/ Accused

¶9

¶10

The State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Arcot Town Police Station, Arcot, Ranipet District. (Crime No.272 of 2025) ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant bail to the petitioner/accused in Crime No.272 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G. Vinodhkumar For Respondent(s) : Mr. A. Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶13

¶14

1/6

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

Crl.O.P.No.31077 of 2025

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 05.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 64(1) and 103(1) of

¶19

BNS in Crime No.272 of 2025, registered on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

¶20

The allegation against this petitioner is that on 03.06.2025, the petitioner trespassed into the defacto complainant's house and forcibly taken his grand mother, who is aged about 80 years to a lonely place, attacked her using hands and legs; that thereby murdered the defacto complainant's grand mother. Hence, this case.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that

¶22

the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the petitioner is in judicial custody since 05.06.2025; that the petitioner was earlier detained under Act 14 of 1982, which was later set aside by this Court, vide order dated 03.11.2025 in HCP.No.1441 of 2025; that the investigation of the case was completed and final report has been filed in S.C.No.107 of 2025; and that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and sought for bail to the petitioner.

¶23

2/6

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

Crl.O.P.No.31077 of 2025

¶26

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and stated that investigation of the case was completed and final report filed.

¶27

Considering the submissions made on both sides, facts and circumstances of the case, the fact that the investigation was completed and final report has been filed and taking note of the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶28

Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties each , for a like sum to the satisfaction of the

¶29

learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Arcot and on further conditions that:

¶30

[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the Application for Surety ship [Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019']. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of the

¶31

3/6

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

Crl.O.P.No.31077 of 2025

¶34

identity proofs to ensure their identity;

¶35

[b] the petitioner shall report before the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Arcot daily at 10:30 a.m., for a period of three weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation by the respondent police;

¶36

[c] On breach of any of the aforementioned conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to pass appropriate orders against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the aforementioned conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [ (2005)13 SCC 283 ];

¶37

[d] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S.

14.11.2025

stn

Note :

Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.

¶42

4/6

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

Crl.O.P.No.31077 of 2025

¶45

All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.

¶46

¶47

The District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Arcot.

¶48

The Inspector of Police, Arcot Town Police Station, Arcot, Ranipet District. (Crime No.272 of 2025)

¶49

The Superintendent, Central Prison, Vellore.

¶50

The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

stn

5/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶55

Crl.O.P.No.31077 of 2025

¶56

Crl.O.P. No.31077 of 2025

¶57

14.11.2025

¶58

6/6

¶59

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Nandhakumar v. The State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nandhakumar v. The State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rizwan Ultag Vs State Rep by

Sethuramachandran Vs The State Rep by Inspector of Police

Surya Vs the State Rep by Its

G.Clement Elango Vs Senthilkumar

N.Ganesh Moorthy Vs The State Rep. by

Sadikbasha Vs State rep. by