Sanjay v. The State Rep By Its, The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P No.28097 of 2025 Sanjay ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Palladam Police Station Tiruppur District (Cr.No.928 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest concerned in Crime No.928 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.Guruprasad For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Section 308(2) of BNS, in Crime No.928 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused waylaid the de-facto complainant, threatened him and taken away cash of Rs.45,000/- and OPPO 5G mobile phone worth about Rs.10,000/- from him. Hence, the present complaint.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any such offence as alleged by the prosecution and based on the confession of the arrested accused, he has been implicated in this case. He further submitted that there is no previous case pending against this petitioner. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reported that A1 and A2 were arrested and only a sum of Rs.5,000/- was recovered, and the remaining amount is to be recovered from the petitioner and that investigation in this case is still pending. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the fact that it is a case of robbery and the property involved in this case is yet to be recovered, and that if the petitioner is let out on bail, he will indulge in similar offences, this Court finds that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary in this case. Hence, this 2/4

Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 15.10.2025 uma To 1.The Inspector of Police, Palladam Police Station Tiruppur District.

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

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

3/4

uma Crl.O.P.No.28097 of 2025 15.10.2025 4/4