Mohammed Yousuf v. The State Represented By The Sub Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.03.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Mohammed Yousuf ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by The Sub Inspector of Police, Vaniyambadi Town Police Station, Tirupathur District.

Crime.No.48 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023 to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in Crime No.48 of 2026 pending on the file of the Sub Inspector of Police, Vaniyambadi Town Police Station, Tirupathur District.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.S.Siddharth For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.02.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 109(1) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.48 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner abused and assaulted the de facto complainant using a knife. Due to

which, the de facto complainant sustained injuries. Hence, the complaint. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is no way connected to this case and has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. 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 four previous cases registered against him and one among them is under POCSO Act. 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 four 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 Sub Inspector of Police, Vaniyambadi Town Police Station, Tirupathur District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3. The Judicial Magistrate Court, Vaniyambadi, Tirupathur District.

4. The Superintendent, Sub Jail, Vaniyambadi, Tirupathur District.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

rap 23.03.2026