Dismissed¶25

Rajaram v. The State Represented by, Station House Officer

Madras HC15 Jul 2026CRL OP/18625/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; Crl.O.P.No.18625 of 2026; Rajaram v. State (Naduveerapattu Police Station, Cuddalore District); Crime No.114 of 2026; decision 15.07.2026; single judge C. Kumarappan; bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023; alleged offence under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (murder of petitioner's father); custody since 04.06.2026; bail refused - investigation at nascent stage, risk of witness tampering urged by Government Advocate (Crl. Side); petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Considering that the investigation is still at the nascent stage and having regard to the nature of the allegations, the Court held it would not be appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. ¶22

Rajaram Vs The State Represented by, Station… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.18625 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 15.07.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.18625 of 2026

Rajaram

... Petitioner(s)

Vs.

The State rep. by The Station House Officer, Naduveerapattu Police Station, Cuddalore District. Crime No.114 of 2026

¶11

... Respondent(s)

¶12

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.114 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.M.Ragul Kousik For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.Yogaraj Sekar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.06.2026 for the alleged offences under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.114 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 1/4

¶16

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

¶17

Crl.O.P.No.18625 of 2026

¶18

It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased, who is the father of

¶19

the petitioner, was found dead in his residence. Upon suspicion, the petitioner herein has been arrayed as an accused. Hence, the case.

¶20

The learned counsel appearing 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 04.06.2026 and that, in any event, his further custody is not required for the purpose of investigation. Hence, he prayed for the grant of bail.

¶21

The 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 been arrayed as an accused on suspicion, the investigation is still at the nascent stage. It was further submitted that, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of his tampering with witnesses.

¶22

Considering the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that the investigation is still at the nascent stage and having regard to the nature of the allegations, this Court is of the view that it would not be appropriate to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. 2/4

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.O.P.No.18625 of 2026

¶25