Dhinesh v. State of Tamil Nadu Represented by

ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on

22.11.2025 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (294 (b), 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860), Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, in Crime No.389 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail. Page2 of 4

¶2The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was in a love relationship with the victim for about two and a half years and subsequently, the relationship was discontinued by the victim due to the alleged misbehaviour of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is alleged to have repeatedly insisted upon continuation of the relationship and on multiple occasions attacked the victim with deadly weapons, thereby causing injuries to her.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 22.11.2025 and that the investigation has been completed and final report has also been filed. Hence, he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶4The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent would submit that the victim has sustained serious injuries in the said attacks and if the petitioner is released on bail the life and safety of the victim would be in grave danger. Hence, he strongly opposed the grant of bail. Hence, he strongly opposed the grant of bail.

¶5I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side. Page3 of 4

¶6From the submission of the learned counsel on either side, it is seen that there are repeated allegations of violent acts committed by the petitioner against the same victim. Even though it is contended that the investigation has been completed, the nature of allegations and the conduct of the petitioner indicate a continuing threat to the victim. The apprehension expressed by the prosecution regarding the safety of the victim cannot be ignored. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner.

¶7Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17-03-2026 NSL To

¶1The Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Coimbatore.

¶2Central Prison, Coimbatore.

¶3The Inspector of Police, Kuniyamuthur Police Station, Coimbatore.

¶4The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o6782oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. NSL CRLoOPoNo.o6782oofo2026 17-03-2026 Page4oofo4

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Dhinesh ..Petitioner Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by The Inspector of Police, Kuniyamuthur Police Station, Coimbatore. Cr.No.389/2025. ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Cr.No.389 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner: Mr. Deepanuday For Respondent: Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)