Krishnan v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Krishnan ..Petitioner Vs The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Magudanchavadi Police Station, Salem District.

Crime No.126 of 2026 ..Respondent 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 Crime No.126 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent. For Petitioner:

Mr.C. Deepak Kumar For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 125(a), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.126 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant, who is the Deputy Chairman of the Municipal Corporation, received information from his wife on 05.05.2026 that two drunken persons were standing in front of their

house and creating nuisance. When the defacto complainant came to the spot, the petitioner along with another accused allegedly abused him in filthy language, threw bottles at his house and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and that the allegations are exaggerated in nature. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation and abide by any condition imposed by this Court. Therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent strongly opposed the anticipatory bail application and submitted that the petitioner has two previous criminal cases. It is further submitted that the antecedents of the petitioner clearly demonstrate that he has misused the liberty granted earlier. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. This Court is of the view that considering the nature of the allegations and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, as rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), the petitioner has two previous cases which clearly demonstrate that the petitioner has misused the liberty granted earlier. In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 15-06-2026 NSL To

1. The Inspector of Police, Magudanchavadi Police Station, Salem District.

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

3. The Judicial Magistrate - II, Mettur.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 15-06-2026