M Balaji v. The Sub-Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.34921 of 2025 M.Balaji S/o.S.Mahendran ... Petitioner/ Accused Vs The State Rep. By, The Sub Inspector of Police, Periyanaickempalayam, Coimbatore District.

(Crime No.30 of 2025) ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police concerned in Crime No.30 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr. S.Shunmugavelayutham, Senior Advocate, for Mr. S.Thankira For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ******

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 189(2), 85, 296(b), 351(2) of BNS and 4 of TNPHW Act, in Crime No.30 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/4

2.

The earlier criminal original petition in Crl.O.P.No.26979 of 2025 seeking anticipatory bail has been disposed of by this Court by an order dated 24.11.2025 on the following reasons: "6.I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel on both sides and perused the records. The majority of the allegations are only against A1 who is the husband of the defacto complainant and others alleged to have abetted A1 to commit such offences. Hence, I am of the view that others petitioners except A1 are entitled to anticipatory bail"

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that he has been falsely accused in this case and has not committed any such offences. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the anticipatory bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that still the case is not investigated and the petitioner has abused the complainant seriously. 4.

Heard the submissions made on both sides and perused the materials available on record.

5.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, gravity of offence, the fact that there is no change in the circumstances, this Court is 2/4

not inclined to revisit the earlier order.

6.

Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 21.01.2026 ssa To

1. The Sub Inspector of Police, Periyanaickempalayam, Coimbatore District.

(Crime No.30 of 2025)

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K. RAJASEKAR, J.

ssa Crl.O.P. No.34921 of 2025 21.01.2026 4/4