CRL.O.P.No.16444 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-06-2026 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY CRL.O.P.No.16444 of 2026 Elumalai ..Petitioner Vs. 1. State rep. by its Inspector of Police, T-5, Vanagaram Police Station, Koyambedu District. 2. Vignesh ..Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to call for the records pertaining to the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.1562 of 2025 dated 26.09.2025 by the learned Judicial Magistrate II, Poonamallee and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.N.Mahendra Babu For Respondents : Mr.R.Rajasekaran, (for R1) Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Crl.Side) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.16444 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 6 ORDER This Criminal Original Petition has been filed challenging the order dated 26.09.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1562 of 2025 by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Poonamallee, whereby bail was granted to the second respondent. 2. The prayer sought for in this Criminal Original Petition is innocuous in nature, and as such, this petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself, without ordering notice to the second respondent. 3. It is seen from the records that a case in Crime No.214 of 2025 was registered by Koyambedu Police Station for alleged offences under Sections 296(b), 118(1), 133 & 351(3) of BNS. The allegation of the petitioner is that the second respondent was parking his lorry in a haphazard manner, causing an obstruction on the road. The petitioner, being an office bearer of the local residents’ welfare association, questioned the second respondent and requested him to park the vehicle properly so as not to disturb the public. While so, the petitioner allegedly https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.16444 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 6 learnt that the second respondent had also harassed a women employee at his office. While the petitioner was discussing this matter with two other persons, the second respondent reportedly attacked the petitioner with a wooden log, causing injuries. Following this incident, the case was registered, the second respondent was arrested on 13.09.2025 and he was subsequently released on bail by the Trial Court on 26.09.2025. 4. Thus, considering the nature of the offence, due action was taken by the Police and the accused was arrested and later enlarged on bail. The present petition has been filed seeking cancellation of the bail primarily on the ground that after being released, the second respondent allegedly committed another offence against the petitioner. 5. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the second respondent attacked and threatened him to withdraw the criminal complaint. The petitioner has reportedly lodged a fresh complaint regarding this subsequent threat, which is currently undergoing a preliminary inquiry. Therefore, at this stage, the bail granted to the second respondent cannot be cancelled. However, it is open to the petitioner to pursue the fresh https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.16444 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 6 complaint already preferred. Needless to mention, if the allegations of witness intimidation and threat are found to be true upon inquiry and a fresh case is registered, the legal consequences as stipulated in the original bail order will follow. 6. With the aforesaid liberty, this Criminal Original Petition stands disposed of. 30-06-2026 Neutral Citation: No Sni https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.16444 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 6 To 1. The Judicial Magistrate II, Poonamallee. 2. The Inspector of Police, T-5, Vanagaram Police Station, Koyambedu District. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL.O.P.No.16444 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 6 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. Sni CRL.O.P.No.16444 of 2026 30-06-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis