V.S.Gnanavelan v. The State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN V.S.Gnanavelan ... Petitioner(s) /Accused Vs.

The State rep. by the Inspector of Police, CCB - Central Crime Branch - II, EDF-III, Vepery, Chennai.

... Respondent(s)/ Complainant Crime No.234 of 2024 Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.234 of 2024 on the file of the CCB - Central Crime Branch - II, EDF-III, Vepery, Chennai.

For petitioner(s) : Mr.Richardson Wilson For Respondent(s) : Mr.S.Santhosh, Government Advocate (Crl.Side) Page No.1 of 7

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 336(2), 336(3), 337, 340(2) and 318(4) r/w Section 62 of BNS, 2023, in Crime No.234 of 2024, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that in order to secure medical seats through NRI Quota in Centralized Admission Committee (CENTAC), Puducherry, the accused had forged NRI documents such as i)NRI Certificate of sponsor from the Embassy/High Commission in the country where the sponsor is working;

ii)Affidavit proving relationship;

iii)Sworn Affidavit from the Embassy/High Commission or from a Notary abroad.

3. (i) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations are false; that the petitioner had nothing to do with the alleged Page No.2 of 7

forging of certificates and uploading the same in the website of CENTAC; that he is either an agent or he was running browsing centre for uploading documents given by the students; and that there is nothing on record to show that he had gained monetarily in the alleged transaction. (ii) The learned counsel further submitted that the main accused have been arrested; and that in any case, the case is borne out by records and custodial interrogation of the petitioner, is not required for the purpose of investigation and sought for anticipatory bail.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent, on instructions, fairly submitted that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may not be required, though his appearance before the respondent police is necessary for investigation.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police and perused the materials available on record.

Page No.3 of 7

6. Considering the nature of allegations, the submissions on either side, the fact that the similarly placed co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Hence, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with 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 days from the date on which the order copy is made ready, before the learned CCB Magistrate Court, Egmore, on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that: [a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Page No.4 of 7

Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity. [b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 5.30 p.m., until further orders;

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial. [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.

15.04.2025 Page No.5 of 7

Index : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order Internet: Yes/No skr SUNDER MOHAN, J.

skr To

1. CCB - Central Crime Branch - II, EDF-III, Vepery, Chennai.

2. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

3. CCB Magistrate Court, Egmore.

Page No.6 of 7

15.04.2025 Page No.7 of 7