Dismissed¶37

Mahalingam v. State rep. by The Inspector of Police

Madras HC12 Jan 2026/719/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Crl.O.P.No.719 of 2026, Madras High Court, decided 12.01.2026 by K. Rajasekar, J.; Mahalingam (A3) v. State (Inspector of Police, Chengam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai, Crime No.395 of 2025); anticipatory bail - second application - dismissed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; offences: Sections 105, 238(a) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 135(1)(b) of Electricity Act, 2003; earlier dismissal in Crl.O.P.No.31680 of 2025 by order dated 20.11.2025; no change in circumstances; gravity of offence; culpable homicide; screening of offence; A1 arrested; petition stands dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The second anticipatory bail application stands dismissed; anticipatory bail is not granted to the petitioner. ¶37

Mahalingam Vs State rep. by The Inspector of Police — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.719 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 12.01.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR

¶6

CRL OP NO.719 of 2026

¶7

Mahalingam ... Petitioner/ A3

¶8

¶9

The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Chengam Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District-606 701. (Crime No.395 of 2025)

¶10

... Respondent/Complainant

¶11

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police concerned in Crime No.395 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr. Praveen Kumar P

¶13

For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ******

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

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

¶16

police for the offences punishable under Sections 105, 238(a) of BNS, 2023

¶17

and Sections 135(1)(b) of Electricity Act, 2003, in Crime No.395 of 2025 on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶18

1/4

¶19

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

¶20

Crl.O.P.No.719 of 2026

¶21

The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner joined hands

¶22

with the other accused erected electricity fence near the lands of one Basha and it was accidentally touched by two persons belonging to the same village and they died on the spot and hence, the petitioner immediately taken the body and dumped into the nearby well. Hence, this case.

¶23

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that

¶24

this is second anticipatory bail application and the earlier criminal original petitions in Crl.O.P.No.31680 of 2025 seeking anticipatory bail was dismissed by this Court on 20.11.2025. He further submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶25

Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent while opposing the anticipatory bail to the petitioner reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that A1 in this case was arrested.

¶26

5.The first anticipatory bail application in Crl.O.P.No.31680 of 2025

¶27

2/4

¶28

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

¶29

Crl.O.P.No.719 of 2026

¶30

has been dismissed by this Court by an order dated 20.11.2025 on the following reasons:

¶31

“5.Considering the fact that the petitioner was

¶32

involved in the offence of culpable homicide, where two persons died and also the fact that it is not only case of causing death but also the screening of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.”

¶33

Hear d the submissions made on both sides and perused the

¶34

materials available on record.

¶35

7 . Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, gravity of

¶36

offence, the fact that there is no change in the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to revisit the earlier order. Accordingly, this criminal original

¶37

petition stands dismissed.

12.01.2026

ssa