Crl.O.P.No.18378 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.18378 of 2026 1.Pandiyan 2.Raja ... Petitioners Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by, The Inspector of Police, Chengam Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. (Crime No.1084 of 2018) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.1084 of 2018 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioners : Mr.E.Sathiyaraj Elangovan For Respondent : Ms.R.S.Indira Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18378 of 2026 O R D E R The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 147, 148, 294(b) and 506(2) IPC (Corresponding Sections 329(3), 191(2), 191(3), 296(b) and 325(3) of BNS) and Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992, in Crime No.1084 of 2018 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that the District Collector allotted a house site to the defacto complainant and others and they have constructed house in the said land and on the date of occurrence, the accused entered into the house of the defacto complainant and damaged the house and abused in filthy language. Hence, the case. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent persons and that they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioners are ready to co- operate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18378 of 2026 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, submitted that the earlier anticipatory bail applications filed by the petitioners were dismissed by this Court on 07.05.2026 and 11.06.2026 on the ground that investigation is pending. He further submitted that the petitioners burned the hut and major part of the investigation has already been completed. However, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 5. Admittedly, it is a case of criminal trespass and unlawful assembly. The petitioners have caused damages to the house of the defacto complainant, against whom, a patta was issued by the Government. Considering the seriousness of allegations levelled against the petitioners and the fact that the petitioner burned the hut, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 14.07.2026 ssb 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18378 of 2026 To 1.The Inspector of Police, Chengam Police Station, Tiruvannamalai District. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.18378 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. ssb Crl.O.P.No.18378 of 2026 14.07.2026 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis