Anbucheliyan Alias Anbu v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16-02-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP No.1192 of 2026 Anbucheliyan Alias Anbu ..Petitioner Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by The Inspector of Police, CCB-I, Chennai.
(Crime No.187 of 2025) ..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No.187 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police and thus render justice.
For Petitioner :
Mr. S Nihar Ali For Respondent :
M/s. J.R. Archana, Government Advocate (Crl.side) For Intervener :
Mr. S. Prabudoss
ORDER
The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 318(2), 3(5), 61(2), 318(4), 336(2), 336(3) and 340(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, in Crime No.187 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.
The allegations against the petitioner are that he was induced by the accused/A4 to collect a sum of Rs.70,00,000/- from the defacto complainant for the purpose of arranging a loan of Rs.35 Crores. It is alleged that the said amount was obtained from the defacto complainant under the pretext of securing the loan, which subsequently turned out to be a scam, thereby cheating the defacto complainant. Hence, the present complaint has been registered. 3.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has never been involved in any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He submitted that, the petitioner is merely acted as a mediator, collected the money, and handed it over to the accused/A4. He further submitted that the petitioner has totally repaid a sum of Rs.70 Lakhs on different dates through Demand drafts to the defacto complainant. He also submitted that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and undertakes to appear, and co-operate with the investigation, and therefore, prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 4.
The learned counsel appearing for the intervener submitted that a total sum of Rs.58 Lakhs cheated by the accused/A1 and A6, and only a sum of Rs.12 Lakhs has been seized by the police from the accused/A4. However, according to him, the petitioner alone received a sum of Rs.70 Lakhs and has
not repaid the same. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
5.
The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner received commission for the purpose of sanctioning loan. It is also submitted that a sum of Rs.58 Lakhs has been repaid by the accused/A1 and A6 and the accused/A2 had deposited a sum of Rs.5 Lakhs for the purpose of obtaining bail. Further, the petitioner has three previous cases, out of which two cases are of a similar nature. Hence, she opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 6.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and taking into account the submission made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) as well as the fact the substantial amount has been repaid to the defacto complainant and that statement has been recorded by the respondent police, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
7.
Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, for exclusive trial of CCB and CBCID Metro Cases, Chennai,
on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only), with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions: (a) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned Magistrate within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, this order shall stand automatically cancelled;
(b) The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for suretyship (Judicial Form No.46 annexed to 'The Criminal Rules of Practice, 2019]'. The learned Magistrate shall obtain a copy of any one of identify proofs to ensure their identity;
(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent Police everyday at 10:30 A.M., for a period of three weeks, and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; (d) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner was released on anticipatory bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji v. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];
(e) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.
16.02.2026 klt
To 1.
The learned Metropolitan Magistrate, for exclusive trial of CCB and CBCID Metro Cases, Chennai.
2.
The Inspector of Police, CCB-I, Chennai.
3.
The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
klt 16-02-2026