Vinoth v. The State Rep.By,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Vinoth ..Petitioner Vs The State rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Ashok Nagar, Chennai.

Cr.No.06 of 2023.

..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under section 482 of BNSS to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of arrest by the respondent police in connection with Cr.No.06 of 2023 pending investigation on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner:

Mr.T.Nixon For Respondent:

Mr.P.Dhileepan Govt.Advocate (Crl Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 420 of IPC and section 5 of TNPID Act 1997, later the FIR was altered under section 406, 420, 409, 120(B) of IPC and section 5 of TNPID Act, 1997 in Crime No.06 of 2023 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that petitioners induced the de facto complainant to invest in their company for higher profits and cheated her. Hence, this case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the occurrence took place in the year 2023 and Charge sheet has been filed. He further submitted that he is ready to abide by any stringent condition that may be imposed by this Court and he is ready to co-operate for investigation. Hence, he prays to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that a sum of Rs. 4.53 crores has been cheated by the petitioner along with other accused and that this petitioner is a friend of A14 who introduced A12. This petitioner has played a major role in this company and acted as an Associate of A14 and involved in Company's other unlawful rowdy activities. Though, serious objections have been raised by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side), he fairly submitted that the co-accused has already been released on anticipatory bail by this court dated 13.03.2026. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have given anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration of the totality of the circumstances and the overt act played by this petitioner and upon the further fact that Co-accused has already been released on anticipatory, this Court is of the view that at this length of time, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail subject to certain 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 Special Judge (TNPID Court), Chennai 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 learned Special Judge (TNPID Court), Chennai, everyday at 10.30 a.m until further orders;

(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.

09-04-2026 SHL

To:

1. The Special Judge (TNPID Court), Chennai

2. The Inspector of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Ashok Nagar, Chennai.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

SHL 09-04-2026