Dhamodharan v. The State
Case at a glance
- Bench
- K RAJASEKAR
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed
Provisions considered
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 s. 483
- Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2005 s. 7(1)(a)
- Arms Act, 1959 s. 25(1)(a)
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 24.09.2025cda3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.26275 of 2025K.RAJASEKAR, J.cdaTo1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Arakonam. 2. The Inspector of Police, Nemili Police Station, Ranipet District. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.O.P.No.26275 of 202524.09.20254/4
Judgment
Crl.O.P.No.26275 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 24.09.2025CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKARCrl.O.P.No.26275 of 2025 Dhamodharan ... Petitioner Vs.The State Rep. By,The Inspector of Police, Nemili Police Station, Ranipet District. Crime No.298 of 2025 ... RespondentPRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in Crime No.298 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For petitioner: Mr.V.KarthickFor Respondent: Mr.A.GopinathGovernment Advocate (Criminal Side)1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.26275 of 2025
O R D E RThe petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.07.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 7(1)(a) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2005 and Section 25(1)(a) of Arms Act, 1959, in Crime No.298 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks bail.
The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with two others created a ruckus on the public road showing a patta knife and threatening the public. Hence, the case.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has 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 to grant bail to the petitioner.
Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that already this Court dismissed the petitioner's bail petition in Crl.O.P.No.23082 of 2025 dated 20.08.2025. He further 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.26275 of 2025submitted that the petitioner has 12 previous cases with no change in circumstances. Hence, he vehemently opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the materials available on record.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also taking into fact that this is the second bail petition with no change in circumstances. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Operative part
Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 24.09.2025cda3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.26275 of 2025K.RAJASEKAR, J.cdaTo1.The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Arakonam. 2. The Inspector of Police, Nemili Police Station, Ranipet District. 3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras. Crl.O.P.No.26275 of 202524.09.20254/4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483; Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2005 — s. 7(1)(a); Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25(1)(a).
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.