Surya v. The State Rep By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.26265 of 2025 Surya ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, GRP Police Station, Arakkonam, Ranipet District.

... Respondent (Cr.No.204 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Cr.No.204 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Sasikumar For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence under Section 296(b), 118(1), 351(3), 109 of BNS Act, 2023 r/w 25(1)(a) of Arms Act. 1959 in Crime No.204 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that due to previous enmity, 1/4

the petitioner, along with other accused, came to Chennai with an intention to assert dominance. The petitioner, who belongs to a particular group in the particular college, accompanied the co-accused to Tiruttani Railway Station, where they chased the defacto complainant with patta knives. Hence, the case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the specific role of the petitioner in this case is that he also joined with the other accused, to participate in chasing the defacto complainant with deadly weapons in public creating a sense of alarm among the general public. Hence, he oppose to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, this Court is of the view granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner to encourage further to involve in 2/4

similar offences. Hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 24.09.2025 ssi To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Arakkkonam.

2.The Inspector of Police, GRP Police Station, Arakkonam, Ranipet District 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. K.RAJASEKAR , J.

ssi 3/4

Crl.O.P.No.26265 of 2025 24.09.2025 4/4