CRL OP(MD). No.1064 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 19/02/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY CRL OP(MD). No.1064 of 2026 Agathiyan Sivaji, ... Petitioner Vs. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Karaikudi North, Police Station, Sivagangai. Crime No.05 of 2026.. ... Respondent PRAYER :- For Anticipatory Bail in Crime no.05 of 2026 on the file of the Respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Samuel Gunasingh, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.S.S.Manoj, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER : The Court made the following order :- The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 61(2), 310(1) BNS and Section 25(1A) of Arms Act, in Crime No.05 of 2026, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1064 of 2026 2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused conspired to extort money from wealthy persons by threatening them with weapons. Hence, the complaint. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Kabadi player and he is not having any bad antecedents. Further, he has been arrayed as accused No.10 and all the other accused were secured and they are in custody. 5. However, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent vehemently objected for granting anticipatory bail and submitted that there is a retaliation murder in the present case and also circulated a video graph, where the entire incident of murder was recorded. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1064 of 2026 6. After perusing the same, this Court already dismissed the anticipatory bail application of the fifth accused. Today, it is submitted that Act 14 was also invoked and all of them were detained under the said Act. The respondent further relied upon the WhatsApp chats, wherein the petitioner was allegedly assigned by one Guna to watch the trial proceedings and was also directed to keep the TATA Ace vehicle ready. In the said WhatsApp chat, the petitioner is stated to have replied that the vehicle was ready. 7. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, this court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 19.02.2026 LS TO 1. The Inspector of Police, Karaikudi North, Police Station, Sivagangai. 2. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRL OP(MD). No.1064 of 2026 S.SRIMATHY,J LS ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1064 of 2026 Date : 19/02/2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis