Vasu @ Veerasekaran v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.03.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Vasu @ Veerasekaran ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Vedaranyam Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

Crime.No.28 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023 to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail, in Crime No.28 of 2026 pending on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.T.Gokulakrishnan For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 25.01.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 308(5) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 r/w.Section 25(1A) of the Indian Arms Act in Crime No.28 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner attacked and robbed a sum of Rs.1,000/- from the de facto complainant at knife point. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is no way connected to this case and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submits that the co-accused has been released on bail Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submits that the petitioner has eight previous cases registered against him which are of similar in nature. He further submits that the investigation is still pending and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may abscond and commit similar offences in future as well. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available. 6.From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the petitioner has got eight previous cases of similar

nature, which clearly demonstrates that whenever he was granted bail by the Courts, he has misused the liberty granted to him. In view of the same, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may be emboldened to indulge in similar offences in future without fear of law. Hence, taking into consideration of interest of the society at large, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7.Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 23.03.2026 rap To

1. The Inspector of Police, Vedaranyam Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3. The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Vedaranyam.

4. The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Nagapattinam.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

rap 23.03.2026