Agil @ Agilan v. State Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Agil @ Agilan Petitioner(s) Vs State rep by The Inspector of Police Bargur Police Station, Krishnagiri District Crime No.383 of 2025 Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in event of his arrest at the hands of the respondent police concerned in Crime No.383 of 2025. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest by the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 311, 351(3) of BNS, in Crime No.383 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2.The case of the prosecution is that, on the date of occurrence, while the defacto complainant was driving his car, the petitioner, along with other accused persons, waylaid him and demanded money. When the defacto complainant refused, the petitioner and other accused abused him and robbed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-, the RC book of the car, and his cheque book. Hence, the case. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the fact of the case is that this petitioner and the defacto complainant are friends and they having some previous enmity and got misunderstanding between them. So, at the time of occurrence both the petitioner and the defacto complainant were wordy quarrel and attacked each other.

Thereafter the defacto complainant lodged false complaint against the petitioner and had been falsely implicated in this case so as to harass the petitioner, the respondent police have registered a false and frivolous case against the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner along with other accused waylaid the defacto complainant and robbed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- from him.

vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of offence and the stage of investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed.

10-09-2025 gbi Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.State rep by The Inspector of Police Bargur Police Station, Krishnagiri District Crime No.383 of 2025 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

T.V.THAMILSELVI J.

gbi CRL OP No. 24498 of 10-09-2025