Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 47884 (MAD)

Dinesh Kumar v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Edamalaipattipudhur

CRL OP(MD)/13263/2026 · 2026-07-03

K Rajasekar

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13263 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 03.07.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP(MD). No. 13263 of 2026 Dinesh Kumar ...Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu rep. by The Inspector of Police, Edamalaipattipudhur Police Station, Trichy District. (Crime No.133 of 2026) ...Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr.P.Yogakrishnan Advocate For Respondent : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counsel for State of TN (Crl. Side) PETITION FOR BAIL Under Sec.483 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Bail in Cr.No. 133 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner / Accused, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 29.05.2026, for the offences punishable under Section 326(g) of BNS, in Crime No.133 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13263 of 2026 2. . The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner herein is the sun-in-law of the defacto complainant. Since there is a dispute between the petitioner and his wife, she was stayed with the defacto complainant. In view of the above said motive, the petitioner went to their house and set fire. Hence, the case has been registered and the petitioner was arrested. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no eye witness to the occurrence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in custody from 29.06.2026 and he is ready co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Counsel for the State of TN (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent Police submitted that the value of the property assessed as Rs.25,000/- and investigation is not yet concluded. The petitioner was arrested only on 29.05.2026. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner. 5.Heard the learned counsel on either sides and perused the materials available on records. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13263 of 2026 6. Considering the nature of allegation and the fact that the petitioner set fire the home, in which the defacto complainant and her daughter were residing and caused damages to the house, considering the seriousness of the offence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. (K R S J) 03.07.2026 TM To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Trichy. 2.The Inspector of Police, Edamalaipattipudhur Police Station, Trichy District. (Crime No.133 of 2026) 3.The Superintendent, District Prison, Trichy. 4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD)No.13263 of 2026 K. RAJASEKAR, J. TM ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No. 13263 of 2026 Date : 03.07.2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis