Dismissed¶27

Sudhakar v. The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police

Madras HC16 Mar 2026CRL OP/6759/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail denied; Madras High Court; Crl.O.P.No.6759 of 2026; petitioner Sudhakar; Crime No.727 of 2025, Villupuram Taluk Police Station; assault on Sub Inspector of Police; obstruction of official duty; damage to Walkie Talkie; sand-theft case Crime No.610 of 2025; Sections 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 132, 121(1), 127, 109(1), 303(2), 351(3) BNS 2023; Section 482 BNSS Act 2023; third anticipatory bail petition; co-accused granted bail; seven previous cases; dismissed 16.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

In view of the gravity of the allegations - the petitioner having assaulted the Sub Inspector of Police - the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail at this stage. ¶26

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

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.6759 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 16.03.2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.6759 of 2026

Sudhakar

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Inspector of Police, Villupuram Taluk Station, Villupuram District. Crime No.727 of 2025

¶10

... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police in the above Cr.No.727 of 2025 on the file of the respondent.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.Maitreya R S For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under

¶15

Sections Section 191(2), 191(3), 296(b), 132, 121(1), 127, 109(1), 303(2), 351(3) of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.727 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

¶16

1/4

¶17

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

¶18

rl.O.P.No.6759 of 2026

¶19

¶20

The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information, the defacto complainant who is the Sub Inspector of Police, Villupuram Taluk Police Station, went to the house of one Sudhagar, who is absconding accused in the sand theft case in Crime No.610 of 2025 of Villupuram Taluk Police Station. When the complainant tried to arrest the said Sudhagar, he abused him in filthy language and also attacked him with screw driver on his neck, chest with an intention to murder him and caused injuries to him. The further prosecution of the case is that the family members of the said Sudhagar namely A2 to A5 including the petitioners herein, prevented the police official from discharging his official duty and also caused damages to the Walkie Talkie of the police official. Hence, the case.

¶21

3 . The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that, this is the third anticipatory bail petition filed by the petitioner and co-accused were granted bail to the petitioner and hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶22

2/4

¶23

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

¶24

Crl.O.P.No.6759 of 2026 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that the

¶25

petitioner has got seven previous case and there is no change in circumstances.

¶26

5. Considering the fact that the allegations are grave in nature as he had assaulted the Sub Inspector of Police, this Court is of the view that the petitioner does not deserves an anticipatory bail at this stage.

¶27