Sridhar Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Sridhar vs The State of Tamilnadu

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jun 24, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1569974

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1569974
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal
Decided On: Jun 24, 2026
Case Number: CRL OP(MD)/4403/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sridhar

Respondent

The State of Tamilnadu

Excerpt

.....by the principal district and sessions judge,order : the court made the following order :-this petition has been filed to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the respondents 2 and 3 in crl.m.p.no.2480 of 2024 dated 27.09.2024 by the principal district and sessions judge, sivagangai.2. heard both sides and perused the materials available on records.3. the main contention raised by the learned counsel appearing forthe petitioner for cancelling the anticipatory bail is that the accused damaged the house lock and trespassed into the house and stolen 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments and rs.1,00,000/-. the petitioner is the owner of the property and the respondents 2 and 3 have no right over the property and the first respondent suppressed the above said facts and registered the case. already the sessions court considered all the above said aspects and granted anticipatory bail. the grounds raised by the petitioner can be considered only during trial and not at this stage and there are no valid grounds raised by the petitioner to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the respondents 2 and 3 and therefore the petition has no merits and deserves to be dismissed.4.accordingly the criminal original petition stands dismissed. (p d b j) 24.06.2026 aav to 1.the principal district and sessions judge, sivagangai2. the inspector of police 3.the additional public prosecutor, madurai bench of madras high court, madurai. p. dhanabal, j aavorderin crl op(md) no. 4403 of 2025

Full Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL Sridhar ...Petitioner Vs
1. The Inspector of Police
2. Jeyaprakash 3.Meenakshi ...Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Joseph Jerry For R-1 : Mr.N.Balasubramanian Counselfor the State of Tamil Nadu(Crl.Side) For R-2&3 :Mr.R.M.Arunswaminathan PRAYER :- Petition filed under Sec.439(2) of BNSS to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the respondents 2 and 3 in Crl.M.P.No.2480 of 2024 dated 27.09.2024 by the Principal District and Sessions Judge,

ORDER : The Court made the following order :-

This Petition has been filed to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the respondents 2 and 3 in Crl.M.P.No.2480 of 2024 dated 27.09.2024 by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Sivagangai.

2. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on records.

3. The main contention raised by the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner for cancelling the anticipatory bail is that the accused damaged the house lock and trespassed into the house and stolen 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs.1,00,000/-. The petitioner is the owner of the property and the respondents 2 and 3 have no right over the property and the first respondent suppressed the above said facts and registered the case. Already the Sessions Court considered all the above said aspects and granted anticipatory bail. The grounds raised by the petitioner can be considered only during trial and not at this stage and there are no valid grounds raised by the petitioner to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the respondents 2 and 3 and therefore the petition has no merits and deserves to be dismissed.

4.Accordingly the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. (P D B J) 24.06.2026 aav To 1.The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Sivagangai

2. The Inspector of Police 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. P. DHANABAL, J aav

ORDER

IN CRL OP(MD) No. 4403 of 2025

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties Sridhar vs The State of Tamilnadu Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice P.Dhanabal