S.Hemanth v. The State Rep By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 13414 of 2026 Hemanth ..Petitioner Vs State, represented by, The Inspector of Police, Sholavaram Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

(Crime No.160 of 2026) ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner on bail in event of the arrest in connection with the Crime No.160 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Sholavaram Police Station, Thiruvallur District. For Petitioner:

Mr. P.Chandrasekar For Respondent:

Ms.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3), BNS Act, in Crime No.160 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail. 2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner abused the de facto complainant using filthy language and also attempted to assault them. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is no way connected to this case and has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submits that the petitioner is having nine (9) previous cases pending against him. She further submits that if the petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he may abscond and commit similar offences in future as well. Hence, she vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5.I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available. 6.

From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the petitioner is having nine previous cases of similar nature, which clearly demonstrates that whenever he was granted bail by the Courts, he has misused the liberty granted to him. In view of the same, if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may be emboldened to indulge in similar offences in future without fear of law. Hence, taking into consideration of interest of the society at large, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7.Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 09-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VEDA To 1.The Inspector of Police, Sholavaram Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

VEDA CRL OP No. 13414 of 2026 09-06-2026