M.Parthiban v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. M.Parthiban

2. N.Murugesh ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Pollachi Taluk, Police Station, Coimbatore District.

(Crime No. 299 of 2025).

..Respondent(s) Prayer: This Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the Petitioners/Accused on Bail in connection with Crime No. 299 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.B.Sargunam For Respondent(s):

Ms.J.R.Archana GA (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 296(b), 351(2), 77 of BNS, Section 67 of the Information Technology Act and Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu

Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act in Crime No.299 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners installed a CCTV camera facing the de facto complainant's residence and subsequently posted the recorded footage on Instagram, portraying themselves as rowdy. When the de facto complainant questioned their actions, the petitioners allegedly abused him in filthy language and assaulted him. On these grounds, the case was registered.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that the petitioners are willing to cooperate with the investigation and are ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Accordingly, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), appearing for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution's case and, on instructions, submitted that the CCTV footage has not yet been removed from Instagram by the petitioners. She further submitted that the investigation is pending and, therefore, vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and taking note of

the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, specifically the fact that the offensive video footage remains accessible on Instagram and that the investigation is currently pending, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 29-01-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order JAI To

1. The Inspector of Police, Pollachi Taluk, Police Station, Coimbatore District.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

JAI 29-01-2026