Sivaraj v. The State Represented By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Sivaraj ... Petitioner Vs.

The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Mangadu Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

(Crime No.14 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.14 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 125, 351(3) of BNS, read with Section 3(b) of Explosive Substances Act, 1908, in Crime No.14 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that there was a money dispute between the petitioner and the de facto complainant's son. Due to which this petitioner went to the house of the de facto complainant and threw country made bomb and caused damage to the properties of the de facto complainant. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner herein arrayed as A2 and A1 is the main accused in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prays 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 due to money dispute this petitioner has thrown country made bomb in the de facto complainant's house and caused damages to the house. Hence opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2/4

5. Considering the nature of allegation against this petitioner, this Court is of the view that if the petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail, the same would give a negative impact on society. Hence, this Court is of the view that the petitioner does not deserve the grant of anticipatory bail.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17.03.2026 cda To 1.The Inspector of Police, Mangadu Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

cda 17.03.2026 4/4