Dismissed¶¶23

Kumaresan v. The State Rep. by, Inspector of Police

Madras HC22 Sept 2025CRL OP/17027/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Crl.O.P.No.17027 of 2025, decided 22.09.2025 by K. Rajasekar J.: anticipatory bail under S. 482 BNSS 2023 refused in Crime No.80 of 2025 under S. 4(3) TN Gaming and Police Laws Act 1930 (Amendment 2021) r/w S. 318(4) BNS 2023; grounds — nature of allegation, previous antecedents (7 prior similar cases per prosecution), investigation pending; petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the nature of the allegation, the petitioner's previous antecedents, and the fact that the investigation is pending, the Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. ¶¶22

Kumaresan Vs The State Rep. by, Inspector of Police — Cheating and Forgery | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.17027 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 22.09.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.17027 of 2025

¶7

Kumaresan ... Petitioner Vs. The State rep. by Inspector of Police, Thiruvalam Police Station, Vellore District. ... Respondent (Cr.No.80 of 2025)

¶8

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.80 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sathish Kumar For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent

¶12

police for the offence under Section 4(3) of Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police Laws Act, 1930 (Amendment 2021) r/w Section 318 (4) of BNS Act, 2023 in Crime No.80 of 2025 , on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶13

1/4

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

Crl.O.P.No.17027 of 2025

¶16

The allegation against the petitioner is that the respondent was on

¶17

regular search was found that the petitioner along with other accused running cotton gaming and thereby cheating the public.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is

¶19

innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶20

The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent submitted that the petitioner having bad antecedents and also having 7 previous cases of similar in nature and the investigation is pending. Hence, he oppose to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶21

4. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the nature

¶22

of allegation, the previous antecedents of the petitioner, and taking note of the fact that investigation of this case is pending, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶23

5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.

22.09.2025

ssi

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

Crl.O.P.No.17027 of 2025