V.Raja v. State Represented By Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17.03.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN V.Raja Petitioner(s) Vs State rep.by, Inspector of Police, F4-Kavaraipettai Police Station, Kavaraipettai, Chennai-600 037.

Cr.No.188/2025.

Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner/accused on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest at the hands of the respondent police in connection with Cr.No.188/2025 pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

M/s.S Chinna Samy For Respondent(s):

Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 316(4) and 344 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.188 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

1 / 4

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner colluded with A1, who was working under the defacto complainant's construction firm, and by fabricating various bills and making bogus contractors, misappropriated to a sum of Rs.2.03 Crores of the defacto complainant. After transferring the funds, he handed over Rs.96 lakhs to the petitioner for the purpose of doing business activities. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not aware of the misappropriation committed by A1 and he admits that some amounts were paid by A1 in this case to the petitioner's business dealings, and the money was also invested in the business firm. He is not involved in any misappropriation or other illegal activities. Hence, he prayed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondent police submitted that the statements recorded from A1 reveals that Rs.96 lakhs has been siphoned off into the petitioner's account through various bank transactions. Hence, he opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2 / 4

5. From the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), it appears that the petitioner has two previous cases and that a huge amount of Rs.2.03 crores has been cheated and misappropriated. It is also submitted that the investigation is pending. Hence, considering the totality of the circumstances and the fact that the petitioner has criminal antecedents, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17.03.2026 cda To 1.The Inspector of Police, F4-Kavaraipettai Police Station, Kavaraipettai, Chennai-600 037.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3 / 4

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

cda 17.03.2026 4 / 4