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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.33726 of 2025

1. Aravindhan

2. Anbarasan Murugaiyan ... Petitioners Vs.

State, rep by the Inspector of Police Nagoor Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

.... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in Cr.No.407 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.J.Jawahar For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioners/accused, who apprehend arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 126(2), 296(b), 118(1), 351(3), 303(2) of BNS, 2023 in Cr.No.407 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he picked a quarrel with the defacto complainant, who is an auto driver, and assaulted him severely. It is further alleged that the petitioner robbed a sum of Rs.16,500/- and snatched the mobile phone of the defacto complainant, which led to the registration of the FIR. Hence, the present case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Though it is stated that several previous cases have been registered against the petitioner, many of those cases have already been disposed of. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and therefore prayed for the grant of bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner is ranked as A1 in this case. He further submitted that the petitioner attacked the defacto complainant and robbed a sum of Rs.16,500/- and that the petitioner has 14 previous cases. Hence, he vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the nature of the allegations, namely the robbery of a sum of Rs.16,500/- and the snatching of the mobile phone, coupled with the 2/4

bad antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 10.12.2025 Vv To

1. The Judicial Magistrate-II, Nagapattinam

2. The Inspector of Police Nagoor Police Station, Nagapattinam District.

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

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

Vv Crl.O.P.No.33726 of 2025 10.12.2025 4/4