Hakkeb @ Pasil v. State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Hakkeb @ Pasil ... Petitioner Vs.

State rep. By Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai West Police Station, Tiruvannamalai.

(Crime No.184 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 their arrest in connection with Crime No.184 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.Rajaraman A Kannan 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 281, 125(a), 296(b), 118(1), 109(1), 351(3) of BNSS, 2023 in Crime No.184 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and other co-accused used filthy language and had assaulted the de-facto complainant with deadly weapons and also threatened the de-facto complainant with dire consequences due to previous enmity. Due to the impact, the de-fact complainant had sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner is innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the injured person has been discharged from the hospital. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioners and others had used filthy language and assaulted the de-facto complainant with deadly weapons due to previous enmity. Due to the impact, the de-fact complainant had sustained injuries. He further submits that the petitioner has two previous cases. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2/4

5. Considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and also considering the fact that the de-facto complainant had sustained severe injuries, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 25.03.2026 mp To

1. The Inspector of Police, Tiruvannamalai West Police Station, Tiruvannamalai.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

mp Crl.OP.No.7498 of 2026 25.03.2026 4/4