Vinoth Kumar v. State Rep. By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR 1.Vinoth Kumar 2.Kasi Viswanathan 3.Anandhakumar 4.Magesh Kumar ... Petitioners Vs.

The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Anupparpalayam Police Station, Tiruppur.

Crime No.428 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.428 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For petitioners :

Mr.M.Rajasekar For Respondent :

Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/4

O R D E R

The petitioners herein apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 19(2) of BNS and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act, 1992, in Crime No.428 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners, who are residents near the gated community by name 'Balu Innovation', in order to have access, had damaged the compound wall using JCB machines. While damaging the compound wall, they also incidentally damaged the water pipeline. Hence, a complaint was lodged by the Assistant Engineer of the TWAD Board.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are an innocent person and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that one of the co-accused, A1 was granted anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.23194 of 2025 dated 21.08.2025. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/4

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. This Court is unable to accept the reliance placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners on the order granting anticipatory bail to A1 in Crl.O.P.No.23194 of 2025 dated 21.08.2025, as the same amounts to reagitating the issue. It is relevant to note that the earlier petition in Crl.O.P.No.23383 of 2025 was dismissed by this Court on 25.08.2025, subsequent to the order granting anticipatory bail to A1.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also taking into account that this is the second anticipatory bail petition with no change in circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

8. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 19.09.2025 cda To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tiruppur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Anupparpalayam Police Station, Tiruppur.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

4/4