Saravanan v. The State Rep by

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

22.05.2026 for the alleged offence under Section 126 (2), 296(b), 309(4), and 351(3) of The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Act in Crime No. 151 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. Page2 of 4

¶2The case of the prosecution is that petitioner along with another accused waylaid the de facto complainant, abused him with filthy language and demanded money at knife point. Hence the case.

¶3The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the petitioner has been incarcerated for a long time and by this time, investigation might have been completed. He further submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any stringent conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of bail to the Petitioner.

¶4Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the Respondent Police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are about two accused and the petitioner has been arrayed as A1 and he has been remanded to judicial custody on 22.05.2026. He strongly opposed the bail application on the ground that the petitioner has got 9 previous cases out of which one murder case, two are cases under section 307 IPC and three cases of similar nature. Hence, he opposed the grant of bail to the Petitioner.

¶5I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions and Page3 of 4 perused the materials available on record.

¶6Considering the facts and circumstances of the case; taking note of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side); considering the totality of the circumstances, and as rightly contended by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that there are 9 previous cases pending against the petitioner, out of which three are similar in nature, hence, this Court is of the firm view that if the petitioner is enlarged on bail, it would become threat to the society. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶7Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 07-08-2026 SHL To:

¶1The Inspector of Police, Thiruverkadu Police Station, Avadi City.

2.The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras CRLoOPoNo.o21735oofo2026 C.KUMARAPPANoJ. SHL CRLoOPoNo.o21735oofo2026 07-08-2026 Page4oofo4

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 07-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Saravanan ..Petitioner Vs The State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Thiruverkadu Police Station, Avadi City, (Crime No. 151 of 2026) ..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail pending investigation in Crime No. 151 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police For Petitioner: Mr.J.Samiullah For Respondent: Mr.S.Yogaraja Sekar Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side)