Manikandan v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Manikandan, S/o.Subhaiya ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep by The Inspector of Police, D2 Anna Salai Police Station, Chennai. (Crime No.325 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in the case pending investigation in Crime No.325 of 2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Duthie Marshall For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 351 (4) of BNS and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act in Crime No.325 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/4

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner had allegedly threatened the de-facto complaint and his family over a phone call. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the 1st accused has already been granted anticipatory bail. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the 1st accused was granted anticipatory bail on the reason that it was the 2nd accused, who had instructed the 1st accused to threaten the de-facto complainant.. He further submitted there are five previous cases pending against the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the fact that there are five previous cases pending against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, there is every likelihood of the petitioner misusing the liberty that would be 2/4

granted by this Court. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 03.03.2026 mp To 1.The Inspector of Police, D2 Anna Salai Police Station,Chennai. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

mp Crl.OP.No.5345 of 2026 03.03.2026 4/4