Muthu Ramesh Nadar @ Ramesh Kumar v. State By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.30742 of 2025 Muthu Ramesh Nadar @ Ramesh Kumar ... Petitioner Vs.

State by The Inspector of Police, T-18, Thazhambur Police Station, Pallikaranai.

... Respondent (Crime No.244 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in Cr.No.244 of 2025 in the event of his arrest, pending investigation on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Muthupandi For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side) 1/4

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 352, 356(2) of BNS, 2023 r/w 67 of Information Technology Act, 2000 in Cr.No.244 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. This Court had dismissed the petitioner's earlier anticipatory bail petition on 11.09.2025.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has already lodged a separate complaint against the defacto complainant, and that the respondent police have been directed to register the case and file a report. He submitted that the present case has been filed as a counterblast to that complaint. Hence, he prays for grant of bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the 2/4

respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that this Court had earlier dismissed the petitioner's anticipatory bail petition and that there is no change of circumstances. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. The registration of a new case against the defacto complainant appears to have been made only recently, in an attempt to escape from the present case. I am therefore of the view that, in the absence of any change of circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to anticipatory bail. Hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 14.11.2025 Vv To 3/4

1. The District Munsif-Cum-Judicial Magistrate, Thiruporur.

2. The Inspector of Police, T-18, Thazhambur Police Station, Pallikaranai.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras, Chennai 600 104.

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

Vv 4/4

Crl.O.P.No.30742 of 2025 14.11.2025 5/4