A Ramesh v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE K. RAJASEKAR A.Ramesh ... Petitioner Vs.

The State rep. by The Inspector of Police, T-17 Perumbakkam Police Station ... Respondent (Crime No.21 of 2026) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest pending investigation in Crime No.21 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Prakash For Respondent : Ms.J.R.Archana, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 318(4) and 344 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in Crime No.21 of 2026 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that A1, who was a sales 1/6

executive employed by the defacto complainant in this case, colluded with the petitioner to supply large quantities of electrical appliances to the defacto complainant and two others, misappropriated the funds provided by them. Hence, a case has been registered. On investigation, it revealed that A1 had supplied goods worth about Rs.16 lakhs to the petitioner and collected payments and misappropriated them. Hence the petitioner is also added as an accused in this case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had merely collected electrical appliances and had promptly repaid the money to the sales executive, who is accused No.1 in this case and that the petitioner had not colluded with A1 or cheated the defacto complainant. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to cooperate with the investigation. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner has agreed to repay a sum of Rs.1.97 lakhs which is the difference of amount yet to be paid by the petitioner to the account of 2/6

the defacto complainant, however he has not repaid the same. Hence, she opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have also gone through the allegations levelled against the petitioner and considering the facts and circumstances and the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail with a condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.1 lakh to the credit of crime number within a period of three weeks from today.

6. 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 is made ready, before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Alandur, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only), with two sureties each, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, and on further conditions:

(a) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) to the credit of Crime No.21 of 2026, at the time of executing sureties before the learned 3/6

Magistrate concerned, further the learned Magistrate concerned shall redeposit the same in any interest bearing Scheme in any one of the Nationalized Bank till the disposal of the case or any settlement arrived between the parties; (b) If the petitioner fails to surrender before the concerned learned 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;

(c)The sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the application for surety ship (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;

(d)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; (e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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. 4/6

State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560];

(f) If the petitioner thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act.

25.02.2026 ssi To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-II, Alandur.

2.The Inspector of Police, T-17 Perumbakkam Police Station.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR,J.

ssi 5/6

Crl.OP.No.4590 of 2026 25.02.2026 6/6