Gokulnath 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 Gokulnath ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Sankari Police Station, Salem District.

Crime No. 98 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023 to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest pending investigation in Crime No.98 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.M.Vignesh For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 3(5), 127(2), 308(5) and 118(1) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.98 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner along with other accused extorted a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- from the de facto complainant, who is a

migrant worker. Hence, the complaint.

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 reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that based on the false promise that the petitioner would get a job for the de facto complainant, who is a migrant worker, has extorted money from the de facto complainant. 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 had extorted money from the de facto complainant who is a helpless migrant worker. Hence, considering the gravity of the allegations and the offence charged, and also taking into consideration, the 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. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 24-03-2026 rap To

1. The Inspector of Police, Sankari Police Station, Salem District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

rap 24-03-2026