A.Arul Prakash v. State Rep By Sub Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 26.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Arul Prakash ... Petitioners Vs.

State Rep. By, Sub Inspector of Police, Sankari Police Station, Salem District.

... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of arrest in Cr.No.60 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Sudhakar For Respondent :

M/s.J.R.Archana Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner herein apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC in Crime No.60 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1/4

2. The allegations against the petitioner is that the petitioner herein joining hands with other accused approached the defacto complainant for purchasing the lorry belongs to him for a sum of Rs.25.50lakhs and paid a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as advance. Subsequently, they failed to pay the remaining money and also not come forward to return back the lorry. On enquiry, it revealed that the petitioners have cheated the defacto complainant. Hence, case has been registered.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that sale agreement was entered only with A2 in this case and the petitioner has not collected any money and prays to grant bail. Further, he has produced the copy of the agreement.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) reiterated the prosecution case and reported that though the agreement was entered between A2 and the defacto complainant, the petitioner is actively participated in the said offence. He further submitted that so far lorry was not recovered and opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the fact that so far no lorry is recovered, though the petitioner is not signatory to an agreement, he is also actively participated in occurrence and met the defacto complainant to hand over the lorry and he has 2/4

not come forward to pay the money, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 26.02.2026 To

1. The Sub Inspector of Police, Sankari Police Station, Salem District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

Vv 26.02.2026 4/4