Vinoth @ Vinothkumar v. The State Rep By, The Sub-Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Vinoth @ Vinothkumar ..Petitioner Vs State by:

The Sub-Inspector of Police, Perunagar Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

[Crime No.16 of 2026] ..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in Crime No.16 of 2026 on the file of the Sub Inspector of Police, Perunagar Police Station, Kancheepuram, in the event of his arrest, on such terms and conditions. For Petitioner:

Mr.Vivek A.

For Respondent:

Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.16 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of prosecution is that the petitioner attacked the de facto

complainant and caused injuries in his head and neck using knife. Hence, the case.

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

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner is having two previous cases pending against him. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, considering the totality of the circumstances and upon the fact that the petitioner is having two previous cases in which one is similar in nature, this Court is of the firm view that it is

not desirable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 16-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SHL To:

1. The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Uthiramerur

2. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Perunagar Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

SHL 16-06-2026