Ilayaselvam V v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Ilayaselvam ... Petitioner Vs.

State, Represented by The Inspector of Police, Brammadesam Police Station, Villupuram District.

(Crime No.86 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on second anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest concerned in Crime No.86 of 2026, on the file of the Inspector of Police, Brammadesam Police Station, Chennai District.

For Petitioner : Mr.Kamala Kanth. S For Respondent : Mrs.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 118(1) and 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.86 of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that due to wordy quarrel, the petitioner abused and assaulted the defacto complainant. Due to which, the defacto complainant sustained injuries. Hence the complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish substantial sureties for his due release and to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court and therefore, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submits that the investigation is not yet completed and if the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, there is a possibility that he will tamper the witnesses and hamper the investigation. He would further submit that four similar previous cases pending against the petitioner and hence he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. From the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, it is seen that the petitioner has four previous criminal cases, out of 2/4

which two cases are still pending. It is further seen that the petitioner is under surveillance on account of his antecedents. Taking into consideration the nature of the allegations, the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, the fact that the investigation is still at a nascent stage, and the requirement of custodial interrogation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 25.06.2026 kv To 1.The Inspector of Police, Brammadesam Police Station, Villupuram District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

C.KUMARAPPAN.J.

kv 25.06.2026 4/4