Crl.M.P.No.12227 of 2026 in Crl.O.P.No.23239 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.M.P.No.12227 of 2026 in Crl.O.P.No.23239 of 2024 Saravanan ... Petitioner Vs. 1.A.Kalimuthu 2.The State rep. By The Inspector of Police, Moolanur Police Station, Tiruppur District. (Crime No.263 of 2024) ... Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, praying to cancel the bail granted to the first respondent in Crl.O.P.No.23239 of 2024 order dated 23.09.2024. For Petitioner : Mr.Deepanuday For R1 : Mr.S.Esakkimuthu For R2 : Mr.N.Palanivel, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.No.12227 of 2026 in Crl.O.P.No.23239 of 2024 O R D E R This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to cancel the bail granted to the first respondent by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.23239 of 2024, by order dated 23.09.2024. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the first respondent has violated condition No.4(b) of the order passed in Crl.O.P.No.23239 of 2024, dated 23.09.2024, which reads as follows: [b] the petitioner shall not commit any offences similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected; 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after the first respondent was enlarged on bail, he again abducted the de facto complainant, and in this regard, a case came to be registered in Crime No.160 of 2026, dated 11.06.2026. Hence, he prayed for the cancellation of bail. 4. The learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that there is no named accused in the said FIR, that the case has been registered purely on suspicion, and therefore, no ground has been made out for cancellation of bail. 2 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.No.12227 of 2026 in Crl.O.P.No.23239 of 2024 5. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the second respondent police submitted that although the FIR was initially registered as a 'girl missing' case, during the course of the inquiry, it came to light that the minor girl had left voluntarily on her own accord, and the first respondent did not take or abduct her. 6. In view of the submissions made, what emerges is that the victim had left her residence voluntarily, and for such an act, the first respondent cannot be held responsible. 7. Under such circumstances, this Court finds no grounds to cancel the bail granted to the first respondent. 8. Accordingly, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition stands dismissed. 20.07.2026 cda 3 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.M.P.No.12227 of 2026 in Crl.O.P.No.23239 of 2024 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. cda To 1.The Inspector of Police, Moolanur Police Station, Tiruppur District. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. Crl.M.P.No.12227 of 2026 in Crl.O.P.No.23239 of 2024 20.07.2026 4 / 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis