Agil @ Agilan v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Agil @ Agilan ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. by The Inspector of Police Bargur Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

Crime No.383 of 2025 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in event of his arrest at the hands of the respondent police concerned in Crime No.383 of 2025 on such terms and conditions.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Thulasiraman A For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 303(2), 311, 351(3) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.383 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with other accused waylaid the de facto complainant and robbed a sum of

Rs.3,00,000/- from him. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submits that there are 14 previous cases pending against the petitioner. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 6.From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the petitioner has got 14 previous cases to his credit and if the petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he may be emboldened to indulge in similar offences in future without fear of law. Considering the gravity of the allegations, and taking into consideration of consequences of granting anticipatory bail in such nature of the offence in the society at large, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. In view of the above, this Court does not find any merit in the present anticipatory bail application. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed.

24-03-2026 rap To

1. The Inspector of Police Bargur Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3. The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Krishnagiri.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

rap 24-03-2026