Ajay Pratheeb v. The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Ajay Pratheeb ... Petitioner Vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by The Inspector of Police, T-10, Thirumullaivoyal Police Station, Chennai - 600 062.

Crime No.20 of 2026 ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying to enlarge the petitioner's anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.20 of 2026 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner : Mr.Ashok Menon For Respondent : Mr.P.Dhileepan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(2) and 3(5) of BNS Act, 2023, in Crime No.20 of 2026, on the file of the respondent 1/6

Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner/A3 is that A1 and A3 approached the de facto complainant and represented that A3 is having land and intends to sell the same. The de facto complainant came forward to pay Rs.10 lakhs to A3, and after collecting the money, it was agreed to execute an agreement for sale; however, no sale agreement was executed. Subsequently, it was revealed that A3, by showing the land which was facing legal issues, collected huge money from various persons including the de facto complainant and thereby cheated the de facto complainant to the extent of Rs.10 lakhs. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the entire allegation is in respect of the land and, as per the FIR, the de facto complainant has parted with some amount to the accused so as to get the sale deed in respect of the subject land, whereas the subject land has already been entangled with other cheating issues. When the de facto complainant approached the petitioner and his wife to return the money, they were harassed, and hence a false complaint has been given by the de facto complainant's wife. This petition was strongly pressed by the learned counsel 2/6

for the petitioner, stating that there are four accused and, except this petitioner, the others were released on anticipatory bail in Crl.O.P.Nos.3224 and 3301 of 2026 dated 16.02.2026.

4. At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police relies upon paragraph 6 of the earlier order, wherein there is a reference to the allegation against this petitioner.

5. It is seen that the entire issue is in respect of a land dispute, more specifically non-execution of the sale deed. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is suffering from cancer and is undergoing treatment.

6. While looking into the factual aspects, the FIR was registered on 20.01.2026 and the other accused were already released on anticipatory bail. Hence, at this length of time, custodial interrogation of this petitioner is not required. Hence, taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, the release of co-accused/A1, A2 and A4 on anticipatory bail by this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.3224 and 3301 of 2026 dated 16.02.2026, and the entire issue being execution of the sale deed in respect of the subject land, and further the 3/6

fact that the petitioner is suffering from cancer, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail, subject to the following conditions:

7. 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 Ambattur, 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) 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;

(b) 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;

(c) The petitioner shall report before the respondent police twice a day at 10.30 am and 5.30 pm. for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

4/6

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

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

01.04.2026 cda To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Ambattur.

2.The Inspector of Police, T-10, Thirumullaivoyal Police Station, Chennai - 600 062.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

5/6

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

cda 01.04.2026 6/6