Santhi @ Shanthi v. The State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.01.2026 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No. 1016 of 2026 1.Santhi @ Shanthi 2.Ganesan ... Petitioners/A1 and A2 Vs.

The State rep by The Inspector of Police, DCB, Perambalur Police Station Perambalur District Crime No. 19 of 2025.

... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of BNSS Act, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner on Bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.19 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioners : Mr.Hariram Kumar For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

The petitioners, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 406, 420 and 506(ii) of IPC in Crime No. 19 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seek anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners have come forward to help the de-facto complainant to convert his land proposed to be purchased by him into a housing plots and collected a sum of Rs.4,70,000/- and subsequently, it was revealed that the first petitioner was working in the municipality and other petitioners and they joined together cheated the de-facto complainant. Hence, the complaint has been lodged.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not collected any money as alleged in the FIR and it is a false case and the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case, and they are ready to co-operate with the investigation. The learned Counsel prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

4.Ms.J.R.Archana, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the de-facto complainant has totally paid a sum of Rs.4,70,000/- to the petitioners alone and the petitioners have promised to assist him to get the DTCP approval and subsequently, it was revealed that the petitioners have cheated the de-facto complainant. He opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. I have also gone through the FIR and other connected materials, and it has been specifically averred that the petitioners have collected a huge amount of Rs.4,70,000/- from the de-facto complainant. Taking advantage of their official position as government servants, it is also a case of cheating, hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 21.01.2026 MSM To

1. The Inspector of Police, DCB, Perambalur Police Station Perambalur District Crime No. 19 of 2025.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

MSM CRL OP No. 1016 of 2026 21.01.2026