Harish Mohammed v. State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Thadicombu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Date : 22/01/2026 PRESENT The HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

1. Harish Mohammed

2. Mohammed Tharik Anvar ... Petitioners/Accused Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Thadicombu Police Station, Dindigul District.

Crime No.405/2025. ... Respondent/Complainant For Petitioner : Mr. M.Suresh, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.S.S. Manoj, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime No.405 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police.

1/4

ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 118(1), 351(3), 316(2) and 281 of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.405 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the defacto complainant has handed over his car to A1 viz., Parthiban by mortgaging for a sum of Rs.70,000/- and thereafter, when the defacto complainant approached the said Parthiban for redemption of mortgage, he threatened the defacto complainant and also stated that the car was handed over to one Asik / A1 belongs to Dindigul District. Hence, the present complaint.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondent Police.

4. It is submitted that the first petitioner has already been arrested and remanded to judicial custody. As far as the second petitioner is concerned, this Court has already considered the first bail application and 2/4

has elaborately discussed the offence committed by the petitioner. The modus operandi is that a person who takes a car on mortgage receives money, and subsequently, when the mortgagor comes for redemption, the mortgagee demands more money. If the mortgagor is unable to pay the same, the car is not returned. At the same time, the said car is used for illegal activities. It has come to light that two or three crimes have been committed by the said gang. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submits that there is communication between the second petitioner and some other persons in the gang, directing the petitioner to generate money by indulging in such illegal activities. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to entertain this Criminal Original Petition.

5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. (S S Y J) 22.01.2026 TRP S.SRIMATHY,J 3/4

TRP TO

1. The Inspector of Police, Thadicombu Police Station, Dindigul District.

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

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No.1103 of 2026 Date : 22/01/2026 4/4