Crl.O.P.No.16621 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 14.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.O.P.No.16621 of 2026 Niyasoodhin @ Niazuddin ... Petitioner Vs. The State rep by its. The Inspector of Police, Sozhatharam Police Station, Cuddalore District. ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.60 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Vijayakumar For Respondent : Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.D.Manimaran 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.16621 of 2026 O R D E R The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 296(b), 351(2) of BNS, Section 67 of Information Technology Act and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the defacto complainant who is the relative of the petitioner, gave a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the petitioner as loan 10 years back for marriage. When the defacto complainant had demanded the repayment, the petitioner had sent an abusive whatsapp message to the defacto complainant. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor had submitted a whatsapp message sent by the petitioner to the defacto complainant and 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.16621 of 2026 basing such statement, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. A perusal of the whatsapp message reveals that the petitioner sent a whatsapp message to the petitioner by using unparliamentary words. In such view of the matter, since there are serious allegations leveled against the petitioner, if the petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail, it would affect the moral fiber of society. Hence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 14.07.2026 ssb 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.16621 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. ssb To 1.The Inspector of Police, Sozhatharam Police Station, Cuddalore District. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.O.P.No.16621 of 2026 14.07.2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis