Maradol Harsha Vardhan Reddy v. The State Rep By Its, The Inspector Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.02.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN Maradol Harsha Vardhan Reddy ... Petitioner Vs.
The State represented by, The Inspector of Police, City Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, CCD-II.
(Crime No.72 of 2024).
... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of BNSS, pleased to enlarge the petitioner on bail, in connection with the Crime No.72 of 2024, pending investigation on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Dhinesh For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl.Side) For Intervenor : Mr.G.Adithyaraj
O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.12.2024 seeking bail in Crime No.226 of 2025 registered for the offence under Section 420 of IPC. 1/6
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner was running a company for trading stock and induced the defacto complainant to invest in the said Company and thus cheated the defacto complainant to the tune of Rs.35 lakhs. Hence, the case.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that, petitioner is in custody from 24.12.2024 and that the respondent has not yet filed the final report and thus prayed that the petitioner may be released on bail.
4. Learned counsel for the defacto complainant/intervenor submitted that, petitioner has blocked the apps which clearly shows the cheating committed by the petitioner and hence, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.
5. Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) reiterated the prosecution case and opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that there are several other complaints against the petitioner received from various other parts of the Country.
2/6
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent Police and perused the materials available on record.
7. It is seen that the statutory time for filing the final report would end in another three days. The respondents have not completed the investigation and filed final report. Therefore, considering the period of incarceration; and since further custody is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.
8. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing a bond for a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate III, Tirupur.
[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;
3/6
[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent Police, everyday at 10.30 a.m., until further orders;
[c] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
19.02.2025 Sma 4/6
To
1. Judicial Magistrate III, Tirupur
2. The Inspector of Police, City Cyber Crime Police Station, Tiruppur City, CCD-II.
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Tirupur.
4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.
5/6
SUNDER MOHAN., J.
Sma 19.02.2025 6/6