Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 09.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 Manimaran @Kulpi ... Petitioner(s) Vs. The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Uthangarai Police Station, Krishnagiri District. ... Respondent(s) Crime No.211 of 2026 PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.211 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s) : Mr.V.Manimaran For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.Yogaraj Sekar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.05.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 87 and 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.211 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner dashed against the defacto complainant and her daughter, who is a differently abled person, and kidnapped her. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner and the defacto complainant's daughter were in a relationship, which was not approved by the defacto complainant, and on account of the same, the present false complaint has been lodged against the petitioner. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of bail, reiterated the prosecution case and, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner has 19 previous cases to his credit and that the investigation is still pending. He further submitted that the petitioner is a married man and a history-sheeter and that, if he is enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of his tampering with witnesses. 5. Considering the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that the investigation is still pending, having regard to the nature of the allegations, and also the past criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 of the view that the conduct of the petitioner, as reflected from his criminal antecedents, reveals a consistent modus operandi. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 09.07.2026 skr To

1. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthangarai 2. The Superintendent, District Jail, Dharmapuri Prison 3. The Inspector of Police, Uthangarai Police Station, Krishnagiri District. 4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,J. skr Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 09.07.2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 09.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 Manimaran @Kulpi ... Petitioner(s) Vs. The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Uthangarai Police Station, Krishnagiri District. ... Respondent(s) Crime No.211 of 2026 PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.211 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s) : Mr.V.Manimaran For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.Yogaraj Sekar, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) ORDER The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 30.05.2026 for the alleged offences under Sections 87 and 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No.211 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail. 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner dashed against the defacto complainant and her daughter, who is a differently abled person, and kidnapped her. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the petitioner and the defacto complainant's daughter were in a relationship, which was not approved by the defacto complainant, and on account of the same, the present false complaint has been lodged against the petitioner. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail. 4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of bail, reiterated the prosecution case and, on instructions, submitted that the petitioner has 19 previous cases to his credit and that the investigation is still pending. He further submitted that the petitioner is a married man and a history-sheeter and that, if he is enlarged on bail, there is every possibility of his tampering with witnesses. 5. Considering the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that the investigation is still pending, having regard to the nature of the allegations, and also the past criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 of the view that the conduct of the petitioner, as reflected from his criminal antecedents, reveals a consistent modus operandi. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. 6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 09.07.2026 skr To

1. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Uthangarai 2. The Superintendent, District Jail, Dharmapuri Prison 3. The Inspector of Police, Uthangarai Police Station, Krishnagiri District. 4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 C.KUMARAPPAN,J. skr Crl.O.P.No.17671 of 2026 09.07.2026 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis