Deepakkumar v. The State Rep By, the Inspector of Police

ORDER The petitioners, apprehending arrest for the alleged offences under Section 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 140(4), 115(2), 118(1), 303(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.0251 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail. Page2 of 5

¶2The prosecution alleges that on July 12, 2026, the petitioners and accomplices assaulted and abducted toll collectors Hari and Udhayakumar from the Nagampatti Toll Plaza to the Kannandahalli Muniyappan Temple, causing injuries with plastic pipes and stealing a mobile phone. This complaint followed a dispute over toll payment where the accused allegedly used abusive language and refused to pay the fee. Hence, the case.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were innocent and that they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that they are ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and they are ready to co-operate for investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. He reiterated the serious nature of the prosecution case, highlighting that the accused individuals engaged in a violent assault, forced abduction, and theft targeting public toll plaza employees on duty. He further submitted that the investigation is still in its nascent stage, requiring the interrogation of the petitioners and the recovery of the stolen property. He strongly contended that if the petitioners are enlarged on bail at this crucial juncture, they are highly likely Page3 of 5 to tamper with the prosecution evidence, intimidate the witnesses, and commit similar offenses, thereby disrupting public order.

5.Hearing both sides and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court takes a serious view of the matter. The allegations against the petitioners involve a daring daylight assault, criminal intimidation, and the forceful abduction of toll collectors performing their lawful duties, followed by a further brutal assault with plastic pipes at a temple premises.

6.Since the investigation into Crime No.0251 of 2026 is still in its nascent stage, custodial interrogation may be required to unearth the entire conspiracy, identify the remaining 20 named and unnamed co-accused persons, and recover the stolen mobile phone. Releasing the petitioners at this stage would prejudice the ongoing probe and jeopardize the safety of the defacto complainant and witnesses. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case to grant the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail.

7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 22-07-2026 GBI Page4 of 5 To

1.The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police D.No. 55/1/6A, Kittanur,Perugopanapalli, Krishnagiri DistrictMathur Police Station, Krishnagiri. Crime No.251 of 2026

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o19543oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. GBI CRLoOPoNo.o19543oofo2026 22-07-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN 1. Deepakkumar 2. Jothinath C ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police Mathur Police Station, Krishnagiri District. Crime No.0251 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023 to enlarge the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest by the respondent police in connection with Crime No.0251 of 2026 pending on the file of the Inspector of Police, Mathur Police Station, Krishnagiri. For Petitioner(s): M/S. Kumar S For Respondent(s): MS.R.S.INDIRA, GOVT.ADVOCATE (CRL.SIDE)