Lakshmanan v. State Rep.By, The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16-04-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Lakshmanan ..Petitioner Vs State Rep.by, The Inspector of Police, Pallikaranai Police Station, Chennai.

Cr.No.203 of 2025.

..Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the Petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest by the respondent police concerned in Crime No. 203 of 2025 on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner:

Mr.R.Parthiban For Respondent:

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

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 420, 34 and 423 of IPC in Crime No.203 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he induced de facto compliant for higher returns and based on the same, the de facto complainant has parted with Rs.35 lakhs to A1 and A2 And according to the prosecution, the petitioner has transferred Rs.27 lakhs to the account of the de facto complainant. Such transactions took place between 02.01.2022 to 20.07.2022 and since thereof, FIR came to be registered on 28.3.2025.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was innocent and that he has been falsely implicated in this case. 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 A1 has already been arrested on 03.04.2026 and he has been under custody. Hence, 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 also taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, the fact remains whether the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required or not. In this case, FIR came to be registered in the month of March 2025 and the charge against the petitioners are under sections 420 and 423 of IPC. The entire issue is involving money transaction which allegedly given by the defacto complainant to the petitioner for higher returns. In such view of the factual position, this Court is of the firm 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 Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, 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 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, everyday at 10.30 a.m., for a period of two weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation; (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.

16-04-2026 SHL

To:

1. The Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Alandur

2. The Inspector of Police, Pallikaranai Police Station, Chennai.

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras

C.KUMARAPPAN J.

SHL 16-04-2026