R.Chinnasamy v. The State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN R.Chinnasamy, Male/61 years S/o Rame Gounder No.1/590, Boyampalayam Pooluvapatti, Tiruppur 641 602.

..Petitioner/Accused-2 /versus/ The State rep.by The Inspector of Police, Tiruppur South Police Station, Crime No.339 of 2025 Tiruppur City.

..Respondent/Complainant Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of BNSSto grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before any Court in connection with the case in Crime No.339 o f 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent police. For Petitioner :Mr.V.Anandhamurthy For Respondent :Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, G.A.(Crl.Side) 1/4

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, and 471of IPC in Crime No.339 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. As per the complaint, a sum of Rs.50,000/- paid as advance by the defacto complainant to the first petitioner for procuring admission seat in K.V.School at Coimbatore. The first accused has also handed over the admission order dated 12.07.2018, which later found to be a fake document. Meanwhile, it is alleged that the complainant paid a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- to the first accused.

3.When the defacto complainant was about to lodge the complaint against the first accused, this petitioner has intervened and promised the defacto complainant that he would settle the dispute amicably, after contacting the headquarters. However, this petitioner had not kept his promise, but staged a fake class to believe that he is in contact with the KV 2/4

headquarters at Delhi. Therefore, the case was registered against the petitioner. Hence, this petitioner and a few others are privy to the memo.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that even according to the complaint, money was given to the first accused and this petitioner has acted as a Mediator to settle the dispute being the District President of the party.

5.This Court, on reading the complaint, finds that the petitioner has not only acted as a Mediator, but he has threatened as if he will follow the matter and get admission to the defacto complainant's son, thereby misleading the defacto complainant. The materials indicates that the petitioner has actively participated in the crime of cheating the defacto complainant. Hence, this petition for anticipatory bail stands dismissed. 21.08.2025 ari To 1.The Judicial Magistrate No.2, Tiruppur.

2.The Inspector of Police, Tiruppur South Police Station. 3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

3/4

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

ari 21.08.2025 4/4