Mathan @ Mathan Mohan v. The State Rep.By, the Inspector of Police,

ORDER The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 351(3) of BNS r/w 25(1A) of Arms Act in Crime No.465 of 2025 on the Page2 of 4 file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

¶2The allegation against the petitioner is that he was in a relationship with the sister of the defacto complainant. As the same was objected by the family members, on the date of occurrence, the petitioner along with other accused went to the house of the defacto complainant, at about 11.30 a.m, on

02.11.2025, they are said to have threatened her with dire consequences and also attempted to attack them. Due to intervention of the neighbours, the petitioner escaped in a vehicle. Hence, the complaint.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this is the third anticipatory bail petitions filed by the petitioner and the earlier petitions were dismissed on the ground that the petitioner has bad antecedents. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and that he is ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶4Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner threatened the defacto complainant with dire consequences after trespassing into the house of the defacto complainant. He further submitted that the petitioner is a history sheeter and has has 14 previous cases pending against him. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶5I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions. Page3 of 4

¶6From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is seen that the petitioner is a history sheeter and has 14 previous cases to his credit, which clearly indicates that the petitioner has misused the liberty granted by this Court on earlier occasions and has repeatedly come to the adverse notice of the police by repeatedly committing similar offences. In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

¶7Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 30-03-2026 DRL To

¶1The Inspector of Police, Perambur Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District. (Crime No.465 of 2025)

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o7666oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. DRL CRLoOPoNo.o7666oofo2026 30-03-2026 Page4oofo4

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Mathan @ Mathan Mohan S/o. Kalaimani, No.2/229, Sivan Kovil Street, Muttam, Agarakeerangudi Village, Mayiladuthurai District - 632 401. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Perambur Police Station, Mayiladuthurai District. (Crime No.465 of 2025) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 465 of 2025 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Rajesh R For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)