K.Balasubramani v. State Represented By, Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN K.Balasubramani S/o.Kanagaraj, No.5/128, Muniyandipuram, Yothakadai, Narasingam, Madurai-625107.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State represented by, Inspector of Police, T4 Madhuravoyal Police Station Chennai.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to pass an order enlarging the Petitioner on bail, in the event of their Arrest in the above Crime No. 123 of 2025, pending investigation, on the file of the Respondent Police, T-4 Madhuravoyal Police Station, Chennai on such terms and conditions and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit to ensure the ends of Justice and thus render Justice. For Petitioner(s):

M/s.Karthik Rajendran For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 303(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.123 of 2025, on the file of the respondent

police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, along with other accused, stole the defacto complainant's TATA Magic passenger vehicle. Hence, the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the stolen property has been recovered. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the materials available on record.

6. Though the stolen property has been recovered and the accused has

been arrested and released on bail, this is a case of vehicle theft. In cases of theft, enlarging the petitioner on anticipatory bail may embolden him to commit similar offences in future. Hence, this Court is of the firm view that the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

27-03-2026 MPA To

1. The Inspector of Police, T4 Madhuravoyal Police Station Chennai.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MPA 27-03-2026