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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Ramaguru Petitioner Vs The State Represented By The Inspector of Police, Kuthalam Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District.

(Crime No.439 of 2025) Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.439 of 2025 on the file of the the Respondent Police.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vivek For Respondent :Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.side) ***********

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 19.09.2025 by the respondent police in connection with Crime No.439 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 232(1), 351(3) of B.N.S, seeks bail. 2.This is the first bail petition. The case of the prosecution is that the de-facto complainant and one Raja belong to the same village. Raja had lent a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the petitioner, for which the petitioner executed a promissory note, and the de-facto complainant was one of the attestors to the said promissory note. After receiving the amount, the petitioner failed to repay it. Consequently, Raja filed a civil suit in O.S.No.216 of 2024 on the file of the Sub Court, Mayiladuthurai. The de-facto complainant is a witness in the said case.

Therefore, the petitioner abused the de-facto complainant in filthy language and threatened him with dire consequences. Hence, the present case. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and and falsely implicated in the case.

and therefore prayed for grant of bail.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) submitted that the petitioner has a bad antecedent and is involved in thirty two (32) previous cases, out of which five cases have been disposed of and twenty seven cases are still pending. Hence, if the petitioner is released on bail, he is likely to commit similar offences.

5. Considering the fact that the petitioner is a habitual offender with thirty two previous cases and that he was arrested only recently, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, as there is no change in the circumstances of the case.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 13-10-2025 nvi To

1. The Judicial Magistrate No.1, Mayiladuthurai.

2. The Inspector of Police, Kuthalam Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District.

3.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J., nvi 13.10.2025