Ap Altaf Riyaz v. State Rep. By Through

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN A.P. Altaf Riyaz S/o. Paul Mohamed Moinudeen, No. 45, 3rd cross street, south balaji nagar, thirunelveli ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep. by its Inspector of Police, E-10, Kayar Police Station, Chennai-600 107.

Cr. No.33/2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to grant Anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of arrest in connection with FIR No. 33/ 2026 on the file of the respondent police, and pass any other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper and thus render justice For Petitioner(s):

Mr. Joel Nitheesh J For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2) of BNS, in Crime No.33 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks

anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, in connection with a monetary dispute, the petitioner allegedly assaulted the defacto complainant and caused injuries to him on 13.03.2026, based on which a case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that due to the act of the petitioner, the defacto complainant was hospitalized for four days which indicates the seriousness of the injuries sustained. He further submitted that the occurrence took place on 13.03.2026 and that the investigation is still pending. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the submissions of the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) and the stage of the investigation, this Court is of the firm view that if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, there is a

possibility of tampering with witnesses. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

26-03-2026 DRL To 1.The Inspector of Police, E-10, Kayar Police Station, Chennai-600 107.

Cr. No.33/2026.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 26-03-2026