Vignesh v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Vignesh ..Petitioner Vs State rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Selaiyur Police Station Tambaram District.

Crime No. 55 of 2026 ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant an anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest in Crime No. 55 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner:

Mr.R.Dineshkumar For Respondent:

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.55 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.02.2026 at about 04.00 P.M., while the defacto complainant and his friends were standing near a shop, the petitioners came in a two wheeler, picked up quarrel with them, uttered abusive words, attacked them with a pipe and caused injuries. Hence, the case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case without any basis. It is submitted that there is no specific overt act attributed against the petitioner and the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation and he will appear before the respondent police as and when required. The learned counsel would further contend that the petitioner will not abscond or tamper with witnesses and is ready to abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner along with other accused attacked the victim with a pipe and caused injuries and the victim was admitted in the hospital for two days. It is further submitted that the petitioner has got three previous cases and he is having criminal antecedents. It is also submitted that considering his past conduct, if he is enlarged on bail, he will misuse the liberty and interfere with the investigation. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the

anticipatory bail petition.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. Considering the submission of the learned counsel on either side, the nature of the allegations and the materials available, this Court finds that the petitioner is involved in an occurrence where the victim was attacked with a pipe and sustained injuries and was hospitalized for two days. Further, it is seen that the petitioner has got three previous cases. Thus, he has criminal antecedents. Considering the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and the nature of the present offence, this Court is of the view that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he will misuse the liberty and the same will affect the prosecution case. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 16-03-2026 NSL To 1.The Inspector of Police, Selaiyur Police Station, Tambaram District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 16-03-2026