C Ashokkumar v. The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN C Ashokkumar S/o.A.Chidambaram, No.6, G1, Gilban Nagar, Madhavaram, Ponniammanmedu, Tamil Nadu - 600 110.

..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

Cr.No.3 of 2026.

..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on Bail in the event of arrest in the Crime No. 3 of 2026 on the file of respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

M/S. C Srinivasan For Respondent(s):

MR.N.PALANIVEL, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE )

ORDER

The petitioner herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 of IPC in Crime No.3 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is arrayed as A2 in this case and had colluded with A1 in selling a lorry as if it belonged to A1, whereas in fact it belonged to a third party. After collecting a sum of Rs.40,00,000/-, the vehicle was handed over to the defacto complainant. Subsequently, the original owner came and took back the lorry. Hence, the case has been registered against the petitioner and others.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner acted only as a broker and had collected only the brokerage amount. He submitted that the petitioner had not demanded any amount from the defacto complainant towards the sale consideration. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

4.However, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent would strongly oppose for granting the anticipatory bail by stating that the petitioner has got two previous cases in similar nature, which clearly demonstrates that as and when the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he misused the liberty and again committing the similar nature of offences. 5.Apart from that, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would

submit that there is no change in circumstances from the previous dismissal, which also cannot be faulted. However, this Court is of the firm view that the petitioner does not deserve any anticipatory bail. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

03-06-2026 GBI To 1.The Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

GBI 03-06-2026