Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 50125 (MAD)

Udhaya @ Udhayakumar v. The State Rep by The Inspector of Police

CRL OP/17763/2026 · 2026-07-09

C Kumarappan

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Crl.O.P.No.17763 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 09.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.O.P.No.17763 of 2026 Udhaya @ Udhayakumar ... Petitioner Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by, The Inspector of Police, Uthukottai Police Station, Tiruvallur. (Crime No.130 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.130 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Karthik For Respondent : Ms.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.17763 of 2026 O R D E R The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(2) and 118(2) of BNS, in Crime No.130 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner assaulted the defacto complainant with hand and abused him in filthy language. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and that he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, submitted that the petitioner has three previous cases and he is a history sheeter. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.17763 of 2026 5. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, it is clear that the petitioner has three previous cases and he is a history sheeter. If the petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail, it may embolden him to indulge in further offences. Hence, this Court is of the firm view that the petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail. 6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 09.07.2026 ssb To 1.The Inspector of Police, Uthukottai Police Station, Tiruvallur. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.17763 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. ssb Crl.O.P.No.17763 of 2026 09.07.2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis