Skip to content
Try for free
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.
See full guide →

SenthilKumar Vs State rep. by its

SenthilKumar vs State rep. by its

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Mar 30, 2026
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1430469

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRL OP/5764/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SenthilKumar

Respondent

State rep. by its

Excerpt

.....event of his arrest in crime no.1 of 2026, on the file of the respondent. for petitioner: mr.camyles gandhi w for respondent: mr.p.dhileepan government advocate (crl.side)orderthe petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under sections 120(b), 170, 419, 420, 468 and 471 of ipc corresponding under section 61, 204, 319(2), 318, 336, 340 of bns in crime no.1 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.2. the case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has illegally exonerated money by giving fake rbi documents and cheated the de facto page1 of 3 complainant. hence, this case.3. the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that thepetitioner is innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this court. hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.4. the learned government advocate (crl.side) appearing for therespondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner has got one previous case. hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.5. taking into consideration of the seriousness of the allegation and theregistration of the first information report on 28.01.2026 and considering the fact that the petitioner has got one previous case of extortion, this court is not inclined to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.6. accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. shl to:1. the inspector of police, cbcid - krishnagiri, krishnagiri district.2. the public prosecutor high court of madras page2 of 3 c.kumarappan j. shl page3 of 3

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN SenthilKumar ..Petitioner Vs State rep. by its The Inspector of Police, CBCID - Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District. Crime No.1 of 2026 ..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.1 of 2026, on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner: Mr.Camyles Gandhi W For Respondent: Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 120(B), 170, 419, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC corresponding under section 61, 204, 319(2), 318, 336, 340 of BNS in Crime No.1 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner has illegally exonerated money by giving fake RBI documents and cheated the de facto Page1 of 3 complainant. Hence, this case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the

respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner has got one previous case. Hence, he opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Taking into consideration of the seriousness of the allegation and the

registration of the First Information Report on 28.01.2026 and considering the fact that the petitioner has got one previous case of extortion, this Court is not inclined to enlarge him on anticipatory bail.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. SHL To:

1. The Inspector of Police, CBCID - Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.

2. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras Page2 of 3 C.KUMARAPPAN J. SHL Page3 of 3

Continue Your Research

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties SenthilKumar vs State rep. by its Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice C.Kumarappan

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales