Baskar v. State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.3179 of 2026 Baskar ... Petitioner Vs.

State of Tamil Nadu Represented by The Inspector of Police, Veppankuppam Police Station, Vellore District.

(Crime No.3 of 2026) ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, to enlarge the Petitioner/Accused on bail in Crime No.3 of 2026 pending on the file of the respondent Police. For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Karunanidhi For Respondent :

Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner herein apprehending arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 296(b), 115(2), 351(3) and 318(4) of BNS, 2023 in Crime No.3 of 2026, registered on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.

1/4

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he is involved in collecting funds from the defacto complainant by promising business opportunities for selling products and doubling the income. It is alleged that the petitioner collected a sum of Rs.18.70 lakhs from the defacto complainant and, thereafter, failed to return the same, thereby cheating him. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was only engaged for marketing the products and that he has not personally undertaken any obligation towards the defacto complainant. It was further submitted that the petitioner is only one of the distributors and that the claim, if any, lies against the company and not against the petitioner. Hence, he opposed prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that, though the petitioner claims to be merely a distributor, the materials on record indicate that he had collected money from the defacto complainant by making false promises of doubling the investment. Therefore, it is a clear case of cheating, and he strongly opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner.

2/4

5. This Court has also perused the FIR and the connected materials. At this stage, there are prima facie materials to show the involvement of the petitioner in the offence. The question as to whether the petitioner was acting only as a distributor or had a larger role can be decided only during trial. However, it is admitted that a sum of Rs.18.70 lakhs has been collected. Considering the same, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 10.02.2026 kmm To

1. The Inspector of Police, Veppankuppam Police Station, Vellore District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

kmm Crl.O.P.No.3179 of 2026 10.02.2026 4/4