CRL OP Nos. 8012,8014,8015 & 8017 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP Nos. 8012, 8014, 8015 & 8017 of 2026 Sadam Hussain ..Petitioner in all the petitions Vs The State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Chengam Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. Cr.Nos.19, 18, 17 & 20 of 2026. ..Respondent(s) in all the petitions COMMON PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest in Cr.Nos.19, 18, 17 & 20 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner(s): Mr.E.Sathiyaraj Elangovan (in all the petitions) For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side) (in all the petitions) COMMON ORDER The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 303(2) of BNS Act in Crime Nos.19, 18, 17 & 20 of 2026 respectively seeks anticipatory bail. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos. 8012,8014,8015 & 8017 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner stolen 24, 25 batteries and generator batteries (Amara Raja) from Airtel towers and other places. Based on the complaints, a case in Crime Nos.19, 18, 17 & 20 were registered under Section 303(2) of BNS Act. Hence, the complaint. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that this is a case under Section 379 IPC and that the co-accused were also released on bail by the Judicial Magistrate, Chengam. Hence, he seeks anticipatory bail. 4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) would strongly oppose the bail application on the ground that the petitioner has 17 previous cases similar in nature and the weight of the stolen property is different. If the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he would again commit similar offences. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available. 6. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it is demonstrable that the petitioner is a repeat offender, which clearly makes it clear that as and when the petitioner enlarged on bail, he misuses the liberty by repeatedly committing offences. Hence, taking into https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos. 8012,8014,8015 & 8017 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 consideration OF the character and conduct of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 30-03-2026 DRL To 1.The Inspector of Police, Chengam Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP Nos. 8012,8014,8015 & 8017 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. DRL CRL OP Nos. 8012, 8014, 8015 & 8017 of 2026 30-03-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis