Ashwin v. The State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1.Ashwin 2.Rajive @ Raaju ... Petitioners/A4 & A6 Vs.

The State rep by, Station House Officer, P-1, Tittakudi Police Station, Cuddalore District.

... Respondent (Crime No.137 of 2024) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of arrest pending investigation in Crime No.137 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners :

Mr.Senthilkumar For Respondent :

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

O R D E R

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 120(B), 147, 148, 341, 326, 307, 506(ii) r/w 34 of IPC in Crime No.137 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that due to sudden 1/4

provocation the petitioners along with other accused attacked the defacto complainant and thereby, he sustained injury. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have not committed any such offence as alleged by the defacto complainant and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court and they are ready to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that, the petitioners assaulted the defacto complainant with iron rod and apart from that, first petitioner/A4/ Ashwin has got eight previous cases among them one case registered under the Narcotic Drugs offence. Similarly, the second petitioner/A6/Rajive @ Raaju has got three previous cases among them one case registered under the Narcotic Drugs offence. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the materials available on record. 2/4

6. From the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is clear that whenever this Court has granted bail to the petitioner, he has misused the liberty, subverted the course of justice, which inexorably forced to dismiss this application, as the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 13.03.2026 ssi To:

1.The Station House Officer, P-1, Tittakudi Police Station, Cuddalore District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN , J.

ssi 3/4

13.03.2026 4/4