Manikandan @ Chinnakakka v. State Rep.By Its, Inspector Of Police,

CRL OP No. 9437 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 9437 of 2026 Manikandan @ Chinnakakka ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep.by its, Inspector of Police, Neyveli Thermal Police Station, Cuddalore District.

(Crime No. 170 of 2025) ..Respondent(s) Prayer:- Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No. 170 of 2025 on the file of respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Gowthamkumar V For Respondent(s):

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Criminal side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 126 (2), 296 (b), 115 (2), 118 (1) and 351 (3) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.170 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner and other accused waylaid the defacto-complainant and attacked him with a knife. The victim sustained injuries near his eyes, and was subsequently admitted to the hospital. Hence, the case.

________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

CRL OP No. 9437 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He stated that the injured has been discharged from hospital. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigation. 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 further submitted that petitioner has five previous cases and has been regularly doing similar nature of offences. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. 5.From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side), it is pellucid that the petitioner has misused the liberty which had been granted by this Court in earlier point of time. Hence, this is not a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed.

16-04-2026 ep To 1.The Inspector of Police, Neyveli Thermal Police Station,Cuddalore District. 2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

CRL OP No. 9437 of 2026 ________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis