Prakash Kumar v. The State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Prakash Kumar ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Katpadi Police Station, Vellore District. Crime No.15 of 2026 ..Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant anticipatory bail to the Petitioner/Accused in Crime No.15 of 2026 in the event of arrest pending on the file of the Respondent Police.

For Petitioner:

Mr.M.S.Sriraam For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 309(6), 351(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.15 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.01.2026 at about 09.30 p.m., the petitioner along with A2, while travelling in a Bajaj Pulsar bearing

Registration No. TN-23-CE-5176, allegedly committed chain snatching and robbed 60 grams of gold jewels and a sum of Rs.1,500/-.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and even according to the FIR, the alleged stolen properties were recovered only from A2. It is further submitted that there is no specific recovery from this petitioner. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) would oppose the application on the ground that this is a case of chain snatching and apart from that the petitioner has one previous NDPS case to his credit. 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 the allegation against the petitioner is one of chain snatching. Apart from that, he is also having one previous NDPS case to his credit. In such circumstances, as rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), the petitioner appears to be a person having no fear of law and there is every possibility of repeating similar offences.

Therefore, it is not desirable to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 17-06-2026 NSL To

1. The Inspector of Police, Katpadi Police Station, Vellore District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

NSL 17-06-2026