S.Veeraraj v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Perumalpuram

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 16.02.2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD). No.2145 of 2026 S.Veeraraj ... Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Perumalpuram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

(Crime No.259 of 2025) ... Respondent For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari, Senior Counsel for Mr.Anandhamoorthy For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.Kaa.Ramakrishnan Mr.J.Anandkumar PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec.482 of BNSS PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.259 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

1/5

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 329(2) of BNS, 2023 and subsequently altered to offences punishable under Sections 331, 217, 238, 241, 132 and 61(2) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.259 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 17.11.2025 one Sathyamoorthy subordinate of de-facto complainant locked the office after 6 'o' clock and handed over the key to one Mandiramoorthy. The same had also been informed to the de-facto complainant. On 17.09.2025 at night hours the unknown persons entered into the offfice for accomplice work. Hence, a case has been registered. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence. He seeks this Court to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that there are two previous cases registered against the petitioner, which are similar in nature.

Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the 2/5

petitioner.

5.It is seen that the 1st petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed and the present petition is a second anticipatory bail application. There is no change in circumstances. Further, it is submitted by the Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that the petitioner has deleted the call logs including the unattended calls which shows that the petitioner is involved in the present crime.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the specific overt act against the petitioner this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 16.02.2026 TMG 3/5

TO 1.The Inspector of Police, Perumalpuram Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

S.SRIMATHY, J.

TMG

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.2145 of 2026 Date : 16.02.2026 5/5