CRL OP No. 20488 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 29-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN CRL OP No. 20488 of 2026 Prasanth Son of Balan, No.25/100, Kattabomman Street, Govinthasamy Nagar, RA Puram, Chennai - 28. ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Represented by, The Inspector of Police, E-4, Abiramapuram Police Station, Chennai District. Crime No.164 of 2026 ..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS, praying to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on Anticipatory Bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.164 of 2026 pending investigation on file of the Respondent Police and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): Mr.P.Krishnakumar For Respondent(s): Mr.N.Palanivel Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ****** ORDER The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) of BNS, in Crime https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 20488 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 No.164 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail. 2.The prosecution case is that the petitioner along with other accused have received money from the de facto complainant on the false promise of getting allotment of a Tamil Nadu Housing Board (TNHB) flat. It is further alleged that, despite receiving the said amount, they failed to secure the allotment and thereby, cheated the de facto complainant. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in no way connected to this case and he has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submits that the petitioner along with other accused have cheated the de facto complainant. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 5. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also perused the records available. 6.From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), it is seen that the petitioner has one have previous case against him, which clearly demonstrates that whenever he was granted anticipatory bail https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 20488 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 by the Courts, he misused the liberty granted to him. In view of the same, if the petitioner is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he may be emboldened to indulge in similar offences in the future without fear of the law. Hence, taking into consideration the interest of society at large, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. 7.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 29-07-2026 KMI To 1.Inspector of Police, E-4, Abiramapuram Police Station, Chennai District. 2.The Public Prosecutor Madras High Court. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP No. 20488 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 C.KUMARAPPAN, J. KMI CRL OP No. 20488 of 2026 29-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis