D. Balu v. State Rep By Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN D.Balu ..Petitioner(s) Vs State rep by The Inspector of Police S-1, St.Thomas Mt, Police Station, Chennai 600016.
..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to grant anticipatory bail at the event of arrest by the respondent police in Crime No. Not Known of 2026 on file of the respondent police pending investigation of this case. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.R.Sai Sundar For Respondent(s):
Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
ORDER
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for offences punishable under Sections 317(2), 318(2), and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, in Crime No. (Not Known) of 2026, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner, while working at Radiant Cash Management Services Private Limited, a firm engaged in cash delivery to collection points, was subjected to regular checks conducted as part of election protocol. These checks allegedly revealed that the amount being transferred did not tally with the actual amount recorded in the register. Following this, an internal audit was conducted by the company, which reportedly revealed that a large sum of money had been mishandled and misappropriated.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner joined the said company in 2009, initially as a cash collecting agent, and was recently promoted to the position of Cashier. He further stated that the petitioner's role is restricted to depositing cash into the concerned bank, and the cash that has already been accounted for and sealed by other employees. Maintaining the petitioner's innocence, the learned counsel contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and that, in any event, custodial interrogation is not required.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing on behalf of the respondent police, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that the petitioner has no previous bad antecedents.
5. Considering the nature of the allegations and the fact that the petitioner has no bad antecedents, and taking note of the submission that his role as a Cashier involves depositing money already accounted for and sealed by others, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation is not required for the purpose of investigation. Consequently, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to certain conditions.
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, 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) If the petitioner(s) 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(s) shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation; (d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; (e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate actions against the petitioner(s) in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner(s) 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];
(f) If the petitioner(s) thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS Act. 10-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Jeni
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Alandur.
2.The Inspector of Police, S-1, St.Thomas Mt, Police Station, Chennai 600016. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
Jeni 10-04-2026