Anbarasan v. The State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23-06-2026

CORAM

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

[Cr.No.90 of 2026] ..Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner/accused no.2 on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.90 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police and pass such further or other orders. For Petitioner:

Mr.A.Kalimuthu For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 115(2), 118(1) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Crime No.90 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seek anticipatory bail.

2.

The case of the prosecution is that due to civil dispute between the parties, on 21.04.2026 evening hours the defacto complainant's son Kavin went

to his friends house at Ariya Chodaiyur, later the complainant's son went to the house of Selvam, who lives near Murugesan's house in Chodaiyur, with their friends Praveen and Jaswanth. At that time due to previous enmity between Murugesan and Selvam, the petitioner assaulted Kavin with iron rod. Hence, the complaint.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was a civil dispute between the petitioner's family and the family of the defacto complainant and only to take vengence, this false complaint has been filed. 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 has one previous case 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 has one previous case pending against

him, 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 anticipatory bail.

7.Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 23-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VEDA To 1.The Inspector of Police, Jalakandapuram Police Station, Salem District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

VEDA 23-06-2026