CRL OP No. 18228 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 18228 of 2026 1. Ragul S/o Veeramani, No.60, Raji Street, Vedapalayam, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram. 2. Murali S/o Dhasarathan, NO.73, Raji Street, Vedapalayam, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram. 3. Parthipan S/o Munusamy, No.3, Raji Street, Vedapalayam, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram. 4. Rohithkumar S/o Ponnurangam, No.139, Yeri Street, Asoor Colony, Walajabath Taluk. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Uthiramerur Police Station, Kancheepuram. Crime No.161 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in relating to the case registered as Crime No.161 of 2026 on the file of the respondent. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 18228 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5 For Petitioners: Mr. M.Navaneethakrishnan For Respondent(s): MR.S.YOGARAJA SEKAR, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE ) ORDER The petitioners/A1 to A4 were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 01.07.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 191(2), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3), 326(g) of BNS, in Crime No.161 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners created a ruckus near the cattle field of the defacto complaiant. When questioned by the defacto complainant, the petitioners became enraged, assaulted him and also set fire to the goat shed belonging to the defacto complainant. Hence, the complaint. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that there are about 9 accused in this case and the petitioners are A1 to A4. He further submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 18228 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5 petitioners. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners. 5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the serious nature of the allegations against the petitioners and also upon the fact that the investigation is still pending, this Court is of the view that it is not an appropriate stage to consider the bail application. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 13-07-2026 DRL https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 18228 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 To 1.The Inspector of Police Uthiramerur Police Station, Kancheepuram. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 18228 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. DRL CRL OP No. 18228 of 2026 13-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis