Jayamoorthi v. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Jayamoorthi S/o. Seenivasan, No.52, Subramani Sami Kovil Street, Kondapupuram, Kaveripakkam, Vellore District, Tamil Nadu - 632 508 ..Petitioner(s) Vs State Rep. by The Inspector of Police Kaveripakkam Police Station, Ranipet District.

Crime No.163 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. Not 163 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police and thus rendering justice. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Sasikumar R For Respondent(s):

M/s.R.S.Indira, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 118(1), 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.163 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that, in an inebriated condition, he assaulted the de facto complainant due to a sudden misunderstanding, which resulted in a mutual fight between them. Hence, a case has been registered against the petitioner.

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. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner has three 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.

6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), it is seen that the petitioner has three previous cases. Considering the antecedents and past conduct of the petitioner, this Court is of the firm view that, if the petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail, there is a possibility of recidivism. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 08-06-2026 DRL To 1.The Inspector of Police Kaveripakkam Police Station, Ranipet District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

DRL 08-06-2026