S. Sathish v. State Represented By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN S. Sathish S/o. E. Srinivasan, Plot No.36, Krishnapuri Adhanur, Madambakkam, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram 603 202.

..Petitioner(s) Vs State represented by The Inspector of Police, Perundurai Police Station, Erode District.

Crime No.187 of 2026.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.187 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. .

For Petitioner(s):

Mr. M .Mohamed Yasin For Respondent(s):

MR.P.DHILEEPAN, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL SIDE)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence punishable under Sections 126, 127(2), 140(1) 309 and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.187 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 25.02.2026 at about 10.30 p.m., the accused person allegedly intercepted the defacto complainant, forcibly took him in a car and compelled him to part with money and it is alleged that a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- was paid to them. Based on the complaint, the respondent police registered the present case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that this is the second anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner. He further submitted that there is no specific overt act against the petitioner and that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that there are totally nine accused in this case and the petitioner herein is ranked as A5. He further submitted that the case involves serious offences, wherein the petitioner and other accused is alleged to have intimidated the defacto complainant and demanded a ransom of Rs.1 crore and that there is no change in circumstances in the present application. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions.

6. Considering the gravity of the offences and upon the ground that there is no change in circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail.

7. According, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 10-04-2026 DRL To 1.The Inspector of Police, Perundurai Police Station, Erode District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 10-04-2026