Venkatesan v. The State Represented By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Venkatesan ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Represented by The Inspector of Police P6, Kodingaiyur Police Station.

..Respondent(s) Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on Bail in unknown Crime No. /2026 pending on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner(s):

Ms.J.Chitra 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 296(b), 316(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 had been conducting financial transactions through an informal rotating savings scheme and an unregistered private "pandu" and chit fund business. Due to a sudden financial crisis, the petitioner was unable to continue payments to the subscribers. Consequently, the defacto complainant, Sangeetha, alleging financial loss and breach of trust, lodged a complaint against the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He further submits that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen with no adverse antecedents and that, in any event, custodial interrogation is not required. He also undertakes that the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and abide by any conditions imposed by this Court. Furthermore, it is submitted that the petitioner has already initiated insolvency proceedings before the Principal District Court, Thiruvallur, in IP.SR.No.548 of 2026.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail, reiterated the prosecution's case and, on instructions, confirmed that the petitioner has no previous bad antecedents.

5. Considering the nature of the allegations, the fact that the petitioner has no prior criminal record, and taking note of the pending insolvency proceedings, this Court is of the view that custodial interrogation is not necessary 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 Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, 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. and 05.30 pm., for a period of 15 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation;

(d) the petitioner(s) 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. 15-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Jeni

To 1.The Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai. 2.The Principal District Court, Thiruvallur.

3.The Inspector of Police, P6, Kodingaiyur Police Station, Chennai. 4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

Jeni 15-04-2026